| Matter of Woodland Estates, LLC v Soules |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 09373 [79 AD3d 942] |
| December 17, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Woodland Estates, LLC, Appellant, v Jo AnnSoules, as Assessor for the Town of Goshen, et al., Respondents, et al.,Respondent. |
—[*1] Dennis P. Caplicki, Town Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (Barbara J. Strauss of counsel), forrespondents/defendants-respondents Jo Ann Soules, as Assessor for the Town of Goshen, and theTown of Goshen.
In a hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review real property taxassessments for tax year 2008 and action for a judgment declaring that certain undeveloped parcels ofreal property owned by the petitioner/plaintiff were unlawfully assessed at nine times their values, thepetitioner/plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) ofthe Supreme Court, Orange County (Woods, J.), dated July 15, 2009, as granted the motion of therespondents/defendants Jo Ann Soules, as Assessor for the Town of Goshen, and the Town of Goshen,in which the respondent/defendant Goshen Central School District joined, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a)and 7804 (f) to dismiss the petition/complaint insofar as asserted against each of thoserespondents/defendants, and dismissed the proceeding and action insofar as asserted against each ofthem.
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to therespondents/defendants Jo Ann Soules, as Assessor for the Town of Goshen, and the Town of Goshen.
Ordinarily, the proper method for challenging real property tax assessments on the grounds thatthey are illegal, irregular, excessive, or unequal is by the commencement of a tax certiorari proceedingpursuant to article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law (see RPTL 706; Matter of Level 3 Communications, LLC vDeBellis, 72 AD3d 164, 173 [2010]; Matter of M. Kaufman 42nd St. Co. v Board ofAssessors of Atl. Beach, 273 AD2d 239, 240 [2000]). Where the challenge, however, is basedupon the method employed in the assessment of several properties rather than the overvaluation orundervaluation of specific properties, a taxpayer may forego the statutory certiorari procedure andmount a collateral attack on the taxing authority's determination through either a declaratory judgmentaction or a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (see Matter of Adams v Schoenstadt, 57 AD3d 1073, 1074 [2008];Matter of M. Kaufman 42nd St. Co. v Board of Assessors of Atl. Beach, 273 AD2d at 240;Matter of Board of Mgrs. of Greens of N. Hills Condominium v Board of Assessors of County ofNassau, 202 AD2d 417, 419 [1994]). Although the petitioner/plaintiff (hereinafter the petitioner)styles its challenge [*2]as one regarding the method of assessment, it is,in actuality, a claim that its property was overassessed. Accordingly, the petitioner is required to pursueany remedy it may have in a proceeding pursuant to RPTL article 7, and the Supreme Court properlydismissed the hybrid CPLR article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action insofar as assertedagainst Jo Ann Soules, as Assessor for the Town of Goshen, the Town of Goshen, and Goshen CentralSchool District (see Matter of M. Kaufman 42nd St. Co. v Board of Assessors of Atl. Beach,273 AD2d at 240). Mastro, J.P., Fisher, Leventhal and Belen, JJ., concur.