Preview
(FILED: NASSAU_COUNTY CLERK 0873172015 12:15 PM INDEX NO. 40454672015
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 File # 9523 RECERMED, NYSFEF: 08/31/2915
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NASSAU
--------------------------------- +--+ xX
In the Matter of the Application of Index No.
Tax Year:2014/15
Spixo Argyrides
Petitioner, NOTICE OF PETITION
-against-
THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS AND THE
THE ASSESSMENT REVIEW COMMISSION
OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU
Respondents.
For a review of a Tax Assessment under
Article 7 of the Real Property Law
SIRS
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed petition verified the 10th day of
April 2014, an application will be made at Part IAS 13, of the Supreme Court,
State of New York, to be held in and for the County of Nassau, at the Supreme
Court, Mineola, New York on the 21st day of May, 2014,or such other, later date as
this case actually appears on the calendar of this court, at the opening of court
on that day, for a review under Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law, of the
assessment upon petitioner's property described in the petition, and for such
other relief as to the court may seem just and proper.
Dated: April 1, 2014 Yours, etc.,
JASPAN SCHLESINGER LLP
Attorney(s) for Petitioner
300 GARDEN CITY PLAZA
GARDEN CITY, NY 11530
(516) 746-8000SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK File # 9523 130680/49376 page 1
COUNTY OF NASSAU
------ +--+ xX
In the Matter of the Application of Index No.
Tax Year:2014/15
Spiro Argyrides
Petitioner, PETITION
-against-
THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS AND THE
THE ASSESSMENT REVIEW COMMISSION
OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU
Respondents.
po ------+------------- +--+ ------ +--+ x
TO THE SUPREME COURT, COUNTY OF NASSAU
Petitioner respectfully shows:
1. Petitioner, above named, whose post office address is
c/o JASPAN SCHLESINGER LLP, 300 GARDEN CITY PLAZA, GARDEN CITY NY 11530, is the
Owner (Lessee) of a certain property situated in the County of Nassau, State of New
York, and described on Respondent Board of Assessors' (hereinafter referred to as
the "Assessors") assessment roll as set forth in the Schedule below.
Schedule A
DIST SEC BLOCK LOTS BLDG UNIT LINE YEAR AV AV CLAIMED CLAIMED
LAND TOTAL LAND TOTAL
48 590 19 2014/15 4,318 4,565 1,080 1,141File # 9523 130680/49376 page 2
2. Respondents are the duly constituted Board of Said County and are
authorized to assess real property in the County for the purpose of taxation.
3. Heretofore the Assessors prepared and completed an assessment roll of
all real property in the County for the tax year as set forth in said Schedule
"A", Thereafter, the Assessors filed the assessment roll so that it might be seen
and examined by any person from January 1 of this year to and including Grievance
Day which was the third Tuesday in January, and the Assessors thereupon posted
publicly and caused to be published in the County a notice to that effect and
further stating that on Grievance Day, the Assessors would meet at time and place
specified in the notice to hear complaints and grievances as to any assessment
appearing on the assessment roll.
4. Petitioner's said real property was assessed on the preliminary
assessment roll, as set forth in the aformentioned Schedule.
5. On or before Grievance Day, petitioner protested the assessment by
filing with the Assessors a written application to the Assessors and the Board for
correction of assessed valuation,which application included statements under oath
specifying the respects.in which the assessment was incorrect, and a request for
reduction of the assessment. The application for correction of assessed valuation
is incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof as if herein set forth
in full.
6. The application for correction of assessed valuation was received by
Respondents, without objection, within the time fixed by law for the making and
hearing of complaints, and Respondents considered the application upon its merits.
7. Thereafter, Respondents made final determination on all such
applications, including that of petitioner, and on the date set for this purpose,
the assessment roll was finally completed and on that day was filed by the
Assessors, as required by law.
8. The Assessors duly gave the notice required by law by posting and
publishing notice of the completion and filing of the assessment roll.
9. The assessment of petitioner's real property on the assessment roll, as
finally completed, is set forth on Schedule "A".
10. The said assessment of your petitioner's property is erroneous upon
the following grounds: (a) Excessive Assessment in that the assessed valuation
exceeds the full value of the property; and that the real property failed to
receive all or a part of a partial exemption to which the property is entitled;
and that the actual assessment and/or transition assessment exceeds the
limitations placed on assessment increases and the respondent has failed to comply
with the methods of assessment computation set forth in RPTL 1805 and 1904; (b)
Misclassification in that petitioner's property has been classified as being in
classes two, three, or four, instead of the appropriate class for petitioner's
property; (c) Unequal Assessment (Inequality) in that it has been made at a higher
proportionate value than the assessment of other real property in the assessing
jurisdiction made by the respondent; the specified instances of such inequality
are the assessment of all of the real property in the assessing jurisdiction and
each and every parcel thereof;and/or, in the alternative, at the election of the
petitioner, that said assessment has been made at a higher proportionate valuation
than the assessment of other real property in the same class on the same roll by
the same officers; (d) Unlawful Assessment (Illegality) in that this property and
all real property in the assessing unit is not assessed at a uniform percentage of
value, as required by RPTL 305(2); and that the base proportion for the
appropriate class for petitioner's property was established and/or adjusted in an
erroneous, arbitrary and capricious manner; and that the property was selectively
reassessed in violation of the Real Property Tax Law, the regulations of the State
Board of Equalization and Assessment, and the equal protection clauses of the
constitutions of the State of New York and United States; and (e) The assessment
is illegal and excessive on a proportionate basis in violation of Art. 18 of the
RPTL because the assessment has not been capped or transitioned, and if the
property is affected by an agricultural assessment, the assessed value improperly
and illegally increases the penalty to be paid in the event the agricultural use
is terminated.File # 9523 130680/49376 page 3
In order that the assessment of petitioner's real property tax be made
proportionate to assessments elsewhere throughout the tax district, it is
necessary that it be reduced to the amount set forth on Schedule "A".
11. Petitioner is and will be aggrieved and injured by the aforesaid
unequal assessment in that by reason thereof, petitioner will be compelled to
pay a larger portion of the taxes based upon the assessment roll than a fair and
equal share thereof.
12. Thirty (30) days have not elapsed since the final completion and
filing of the assessments roll and the giving of notice thereof, as required by
law.
13. No previous application has been made to any court or judge to review
the assessment for this year.
WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully prays:
(a) That the assessment roll be reviewed and corrected and that the
assessment of petitioner's real property be reduced to proper amounts and be
properly equalized with the assessments of other real property on the same roll;
(b) That this court take evidence, or cause same to be taken to enable
petitioner to show the inequity and error of the assessment of petitioner's real
property; and
(c) For such other and further relief as may be just and proper,
together with the costs and disbursements of this proceeding.
JASPAN SCHLESINGER LLP
Attorney(s) for Petitioner
300 GARDEN CITY PLAZA
GARDEN CITY, NY 11530
(516) 746-8000
VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK)
ss:
COUNTY OF NASSAU )
Andrew M. Mahony, being duly sworn, deposes and says, that deponent is the
agent of the petitioner in the within proceeding, that deponent has read the
foregoing petition and knows the contents thereof; that upon information and
belief, the same is true to deponent's own knowledge; deponent's information and
knowledge based upon examination of documentary records of petitioner and
respondents.
Andrew M. Mahony
Sworn to before me this
EN lew. 2014
- t
Kora Elana Levin
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01LE6110724
Qualified in New York County
Commission Expires June 1, 2016
Preview
(FILED: NASSAU_COUNTY CLERK 0873172015 12:15 PM INDEX NO. 40454672015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 File # 9523 RECERMED, NYSFEF: 08/31/2915 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU --------------------------------- +--+ xX In the Matter of the Application of Index No. Tax Year:2014/15 Spixo Argyrides Petitioner, NOTICE OF PETITION -against- THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS AND THE THE ASSESSMENT REVIEW COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU Respondents. For a review of a Tax Assessment under Article 7 of the Real Property Law SIRS PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed petition verified the 10th day of April 2014, an application will be made at Part IAS 13, of the Supreme Court, State of New York, to be held in and for the County of Nassau, at the Supreme Court, Mineola, New York on the 21st day of May, 2014,or such other, later date as this case actually appears on the calendar of this court, at the opening of court on that day, for a review under Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law, of the assessment upon petitioner's property described in the petition, and for such other relief as to the court may seem just and proper. Dated: April 1, 2014 Yours, etc., JASPAN SCHLESINGER LLP Attorney(s) for Petitioner 300 GARDEN CITY PLAZA GARDEN CITY, NY 11530 (516) 746-8000SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK File # 9523 130680/49376 page 1 COUNTY OF NASSAU ------ +--+ xX In the Matter of the Application of Index No. Tax Year:2014/15 Spiro Argyrides Petitioner, PETITION -against- THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS AND THE THE ASSESSMENT REVIEW COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU Respondents. po ------+------------- +--+ ------ +--+ x TO THE SUPREME COURT, COUNTY OF NASSAU Petitioner respectfully shows: 1. Petitioner, above named, whose post office address is c/o JASPAN SCHLESINGER LLP, 300 GARDEN CITY PLAZA, GARDEN CITY NY 11530, is the Owner (Lessee) of a certain property situated in the County of Nassau, State of New York, and described on Respondent Board of Assessors' (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessors") assessment roll as set forth in the Schedule below. Schedule A DIST SEC BLOCK LOTS BLDG UNIT LINE YEAR AV AV CLAIMED CLAIMED LAND TOTAL LAND TOTAL 48 590 19 2014/15 4,318 4,565 1,080 1,141File # 9523 130680/49376 page 2 2. Respondents are the duly constituted Board of Said County and are authorized to assess real property in the County for the purpose of taxation. 3. Heretofore the Assessors prepared and completed an assessment roll of all real property in the County for the tax year as set forth in said Schedule "A", Thereafter, the Assessors filed the assessment roll so that it might be seen and examined by any person from January 1 of this year to and including Grievance Day which was the third Tuesday in January, and the Assessors thereupon posted publicly and caused to be published in the County a notice to that effect and further stating that on Grievance Day, the Assessors would meet at time and place specified in the notice to hear complaints and grievances as to any assessment appearing on the assessment roll. 4. Petitioner's said real property was assessed on the preliminary assessment roll, as set forth in the aformentioned Schedule. 5. On or before Grievance Day, petitioner protested the assessment by filing with the Assessors a written application to the Assessors and the Board for correction of assessed valuation,which application included statements under oath specifying the respects.in which the assessment was incorrect, and a request for reduction of the assessment. The application for correction of assessed valuation is incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof as if herein set forth in full. 6. The application for correction of assessed valuation was received by Respondents, without objection, within the time fixed by law for the making and hearing of complaints, and Respondents considered the application upon its merits. 7. Thereafter, Respondents made final determination on all such applications, including that of petitioner, and on the date set for this purpose, the assessment roll was finally completed and on that day was filed by the Assessors, as required by law. 8. The Assessors duly gave the notice required by law by posting and publishing notice of the completion and filing of the assessment roll. 9. The assessment of petitioner's real property on the assessment roll, as finally completed, is set forth on Schedule "A". 10. The said assessment of your petitioner's property is erroneous upon the following grounds: (a) Excessive Assessment in that the assessed valuation exceeds the full value of the property; and that the real property failed to receive all or a part of a partial exemption to which the property is entitled; and that the actual assessment and/or transition assessment exceeds the limitations placed on assessment increases and the respondent has failed to comply with the methods of assessment computation set forth in RPTL 1805 and 1904; (b) Misclassification in that petitioner's property has been classified as being in classes two, three, or four, instead of the appropriate class for petitioner's property; (c) Unequal Assessment (Inequality) in that it has been made at a higher proportionate value than the assessment of other real property in the assessing jurisdiction made by the respondent; the specified instances of such inequality are the assessment of all of the real property in the assessing jurisdiction and each and every parcel thereof;and/or, in the alternative, at the election of the petitioner, that said assessment has been made at a higher proportionate valuation than the assessment of other real property in the same class on the same roll by the same officers; (d) Unlawful Assessment (Illegality) in that this property and all real property in the assessing unit is not assessed at a uniform percentage of value, as required by RPTL 305(2); and that the base proportion for the appropriate class for petitioner's property was established and/or adjusted in an erroneous, arbitrary and capricious manner; and that the property was selectively reassessed in violation of the Real Property Tax Law, the regulations of the State Board of Equalization and Assessment, and the equal protection clauses of the constitutions of the State of New York and United States; and (e) The assessment is illegal and excessive on a proportionate basis in violation of Art. 18 of the RPTL because the assessment has not been capped or transitioned, and if the property is affected by an agricultural assessment, the assessed value improperly and illegally increases the penalty to be paid in the event the agricultural use is terminated.File # 9523 130680/49376 page 3 In order that the assessment of petitioner's real property tax be made proportionate to assessments elsewhere throughout the tax district, it is necessary that it be reduced to the amount set forth on Schedule "A". 11. Petitioner is and will be aggrieved and injured by the aforesaid unequal assessment in that by reason thereof, petitioner will be compelled to pay a larger portion of the taxes based upon the assessment roll than a fair and equal share thereof. 12. Thirty (30) days have not elapsed since the final completion and filing of the assessments roll and the giving of notice thereof, as required by law. 13. No previous application has been made to any court or judge to review the assessment for this year. WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully prays: (a) That the assessment roll be reviewed and corrected and that the assessment of petitioner's real property be reduced to proper amounts and be properly equalized with the assessments of other real property on the same roll; (b) That this court take evidence, or cause same to be taken to enable petitioner to show the inequity and error of the assessment of petitioner's real property; and (c) For such other and further relief as may be just and proper, together with the costs and disbursements of this proceeding. JASPAN SCHLESINGER LLP Attorney(s) for Petitioner 300 GARDEN CITY PLAZA GARDEN CITY, NY 11530 (516) 746-8000 VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK) ss: COUNTY OF NASSAU ) Andrew M. Mahony, being duly sworn, deposes and says, that deponent is the agent of the petitioner in the within proceeding, that deponent has read the foregoing petition and knows the contents thereof; that upon information and belief, the same is true to deponent's own knowledge; deponent's information and knowledge based upon examination of documentary records of petitioner and respondents. Andrew M. Mahony Sworn to before me this EN lew. 2014 - t Kora Elana Levin Notary Public, State of New York No. 01LE6110724 Qualified in New York County Commission Expires June 1, 2016