Southeastern Container, Inc
ST ATE OF NEW YORK
SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF DUTCHESS
In the Matter of the Application for Review Under
Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law of a Tax
Assessment by SOUTHEASTERN
CONTAINER, INC.,
Respondents.
NOTI~E OF. PETITION
.?-oo~\ ~J-1J
INDEX NQ:.: 0
g oC
-..1- -I
TAX YEA!: 2opj;~
'""'"' '.'" :;:0 ......
'-' ' '\:;:;::.' . .
I <.J.(/l
vJ'..:::: <J> (/l
Date ofFili~: ~~~~~Ig
oX
Q rq-l
N -<
.J
Petitioner,
against
CHRISTIAN HARKINS, as the Assessor of the
TOWN OF WAPPINGER, New York and The
BOARD OFASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE
TOWN OF WAPPINGER, NEW YORK,
TO THE RESPONDENTS NAMED WITHIN: PLEASE TAKE NOTE THAT, upon
the annexed verified Petition, an application will be made, pursuant to the provisions of the Real
Property Tax Law of the State of New York, at a Special Term of this Court, to be held at the
Dutchess County Supreme Court, Poughkeepsie, New York on the 3rd day of October, 2007 at
9:30 o'clock** in the forenoon of that day or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard for the
relief prayed for in the said Petition upon the grounds set forth therein, and for such other and
further relief as may be just and proper~
AUG
o fj 20Q;
DoUgl~~~~t<
GATES & ADAMS, P.c.
Attorneys for Petitioner
Office and Post Office Address
28 East Main Street, Suite 600
Rochester, New York 14614
(585) 232-6900
Dated: Roch1tter, New York
July _, 2007
4SS At,i,
E:.'S:'
"'s~,>
~fI':-.^-':f'
**This date subject to change depending upon the Supreme Court Clerk's Calendar.
ST ATE OF NEW YORK
SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF DUTCHESS
In the Matter of the Application for'Review Under
Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law of a Tax
Assessment by SOUTHEASTERN
CONTAINER, INC.,
Petitioner,
PETITION
against
INDEX NO.:
CHRISTIAN HARKINS, ASSESSOR of the Town
of WAPPINGER and the BOARD
OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE TOWN
OF WAPPINGER, NEW YORK
Tax Year: 2007
Date of Filing:
Respondents.
The petitioner, Southeastern Container, Inc., by its attorneys, Gates & Adams, P.c.,
alleges as follows:
1. At all times herein mentioned, and for purposes of this proceeding, Petitioner
was and still is a taxpayer of the municipality whose Assessor and Board of Assessment Review
are the Respondents in the Proceeding (referred to hereafter as the assessing jurisdiction), and is
an aggrieved party with respect to the challenged assessment within the meaning of New York
Real Property Tax Law (RPTL) Section 706.
2. The Respondents have prepared, completed and perfected, purportedly according
to law, an assessment roll for the Town of Wappinger for the tax year 2007, for purposes of the
levy of real property taxes by the Town of Wappinger and other municipalities and taxing
authorities.
3. Town's assessment roll included a fully taxable assessment of Petitioner's real
property as set forth below:
. '.
Address:
151 Airport Drive
Tax ill No.:
6259-02-841673
Assessment on current roll:
$16,000,000
4. Respondents the Board of Assessment Review and/or the Assessor are
authorized to assess the real property in the Town.
5. Respondent Board of Assessment Review is authorized to hear and determine
complaints in relation to assessments, and has all the powers and duties granted to a Board of
Assessment Review by the Real Property Tax Law.
6. The Assessor prepared and completed a tentative assessment roll of all real
property in the Town for the tax year 2007.
7. On or before Grievance Day, Petitioner duly made and filed with Respondents a
written application and statement under oath, to have the assessed valuation of said real property
corrected and revised, specifying therein the respects in which the assessment complained of
was incorrect; and the said application and statement, filed in due time with the proper officials,
requested reduction of the assessments complained of to the following amount: $12,000,000.
This application and statement is incorporated by reference and made a part of this Petition as if
fully set forth herein.
8. Upon information and belief, a final decision and determination on the said
application and statement were rendered by the Respondents who failed and refused to correct
or reduce the assessment as requested and otherwise confirmed the assessed valuation of
Petitioner's property as it appeared on the tentative assessment roll.
9. Thirty (30) days have not elapsed since the legally required time for filing of a
certified copy of the completed and verified assessment roll and public notice thereof.
2
10. The said assessment of your Petitioner's property is erroneous, unequal and
excessive.
11. The Petitioner is aggrieved and injured by said assessment, and will be required
to pay a greater amount and proportion of taxes than it would be required to pay if the said
assessment has been just and accurate.
12. No provision is made by law for an appeal or other relief from respondent's final
determination except by review on Petition to the Supreme Court, and no previous application
for the relief sought herein has been made to any court or judge.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner prays that the Supreme Court review and correct on the
merits the aforementioned final determination of the Respondents on the grounds set forth in
this Petition, and that the Court take evidence to enable Petitioner to show the erroneous,
unequal and excessive assessment of its real property to the end that the assessment may be
reduced to the full, true and fair market value thereof for land an improvements and at the same
ratio as other properties are generally assessed on the same roll; and for such other and further
relief as the Court may deem proper, together with the costs and disbursements of this
proceeding.
Dated: Rochester, New York
July ~, 2007
I~?~
Douglas S. ates, .
GATES & ADAMS
Attorneys for Petitioner
28 East Main Street, Suite 600
Rochester, New York 14614
Telephone: (585) 232-6900
3
~I.l.
STATEOFMEV;YO~ 1Jf;)~ ~(:~
COUNTY OF )SS: Bu."~
C."'Altlf.S p. CtPPs: being duly sworn, deposes an says that he is the
VY. l=~~A~C~
, of So""~~1C."";\Fa"J ~~~e Corporation named within
as Petitioner; that he has read the foregoing Petition and knows the contents thereof; and that the
same is true to this own knowledge, except to the matters herein stated to be alleged upon
information and belief; and, as to those matters, he believes them to be true.
Deponent further says that the reason this verification is made by deponent and
not by Petitioner is that Petitioner is a domestic corporation and deponent is an officer thereof,
to wit: its
~~~ C,~
Swql}l to before me this
o.co~ day of 7 ~"t ' 2007.
C~Ar f J.I~L /J
Notary Public ~
('t\ u ~IV\ "" as'\~ ~~p;ttS 4oY\' S - (};; "'~/"t)
1fi~~::~'~~ .
-I'T' -~ ~
J ~O'TAIIJ- ~ \
\ ~~ il
'\ ~~ ~ .- -~"/
\~E~,~
'11"'''IIII1I1\\\\\\~
4