No preview available
Southeastern Container, Inc STATE 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., o w tg > ~ - co W ~ () ....J W :::::> 0:-' PAULA SARVIS, as the Assessor of the TOWN OF WAPPINGER, New York and The BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER, NEW YORK, Petitioner, against Respondents. 2(iiif, fl It ') 0 ........',^' vr..~,f_ c:... 0 Pfj I: 34 ~ a: w ....J o NOTICE OF PETITION Z ~ INDEQ()06[ ~Jl ~ T AX YEAR: 2006 Date of Filing: 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 4th day of October, 2006 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. Dated: Rochester, New York July ~I), 2006 DOU~';:t;.te~ ~ 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 **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.: LORETTA BRUNELLO as THE ASSESSOR of the Town of WAPPINGER and the BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER Tax Year: 2006-2007 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 2006, 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: $5,332,500 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 Board of Assessment Review and/or the Assessor prepared and completed a tentative assessment roll of all real property in the Town for the tax year 2006. 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: $4,266,000. This application and statement are 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 'foIl and public notice thereof. 2 10. The said assessment of Petitioner's property is erroneous upon the following ground: Unequal Assessment, to wit. 11. The subject property is assessed at a full value of $5,332,500. The true full value of Petitioner's property is $10,800,000. 12. Upon information and belief, other parcels of real property within the assessing jurisdiction are, assessed fractionally at no more than thirty nine and five tenths percent (39.5%) of full value. Accordingly, Petitioner's property should be a assessed at not more than $4,266,000. 13. The Petitioner is aggrieved and injured by said unjust, excess, unequal and erroneous 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. 14. No provision is made by law for an appeal or other relief from respondents' 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 unjust, excessive, unequal and erroneous 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 and 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. 3 Dated: Rochester, New York July 11-, 2006 /~ ')- F Douglas S. ates, E . GATES & ADAMS Attorneys for Petitioner 28 East Main Street, Suite 600 Rochester, New York 14614 Telephone: (585) 232-6900 ST A TE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF DUTCHESS )SS: CHARLES D. CAPPS, being duly sworn, deposes an says that he is the Vice President- Finance, of Southeastern Container, Inc., the 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 Vice President - Finance. \\\\\\\\11 ':!\\\' #..l,.'(:..\..\.. ~ r~' ~ ~v ~~ 0 ~ ~ %~~ LJ j ~ ~~ ~-'-'II "E ,~~ ~ &ktll /Ve, ~~ 11''''1111 \ .~..c ,.., Sworn to before me this &~ &1 daYOf~.2006. cth:.:;~ic - H . vUJ. ~~ @t{AL ;;7/..20 II "'1111. W 1'1-'0; . J.: % --fA ~ -~ ~ J- ~ ~ C)~ ~ C'u(W' 4