Bank of America, Lessee
SUPREME COURT OF THB STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF DUTCHESS
D-W-U-3
In the Matter of
BANK OF AMERICA, LESSEE,
Pe,t.itioner~
PETITION
Index No. 2005-
~7
Tax Map Description
Grid: 19-6157-02-609919-0000
-against-
THE ASSESSOR OF THE TOWN OF WAPP!NGER, AND
THE:BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE TOWN,
OF vJAPPINGER,
Respondents.
r"
(~
(.-::~
'CJl
~-
C:.
(.-
Tax Year 2005/06C=
I-
I ,
-...J
"lC-1
: I
NOTICE OF PETITION
.0(>;
TO THE RESPONDENTS WITHIN NAMED:
<--) :::
l'<fl_u.;
PLEASE TAKE NOTE THAT, upon the annexed verified petition, an
application will be made" pursuant to the provisions of the Real
Property'Tax Law at IAS for Tax Certiorari of this Court, tocbe
, ,
held at .the courthouse located ,at 10 Market Street, Poughkeep.sie,
New York 12601 on
August 31, 2005
at 9:30 a.m., or as soon
thereafter as counsel can be h~ard, for the relief prayed for in
said petition, upon grounds set forth therein, and for such other
and further relief as may be just and prop~r under the
circumstances.
Dated: July ~, 2005
G. KOCH, ESQ.
Attorney for Petitioner
,170 Old Country Road Sui te 315
Mineola, New York 11501
(51'6) 294-9710
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF DUTCHESS
In the Matte~ of
PETITION
Index No. &~()5 ~3r;lD 1
BANK OF AMERICA, LESSEE,
Petitioner,
-ag ainst-
THE ASSESSOR OF THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER, AND
THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE TOWN
OF vJAPPINGER,
Respondents.
TO THE SUP~~~ COU~T OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK:
The above-:J.amed petitione::-, by his atto~ney, DAVID G. KOCa,
ESQ., respectfully alleges as follows:
1. At all times he~ein mentioned, petitioner was and s~ill is
a taxpaye::- of the municipality whose Assesso~ is the
~espondent
he~ein
(he~einafte~
~efe ~ ~ed
to
as
"the
assessing ju::-isdiction") a..."ld is an agg::-ieved pa~ty with
respect to t~e assessment within ~~e meaning of S706, Real
Prope~ty Tax Law, State of New Yo~k.
2. The ~esponde:J.t has he::-etofore p~epared, completed and
perfected, pu~po~tedly acco~ding to law, ~"l assessment roll
for the assessi:J.g ju::-isdiction, for the tax year 2005/06
which assess~ent ~oll included an assessment for your
petitioner's ~eal prope~ty, desc~ibed in column I and
assessed as set. fo~th on page 3 in column II of the
following schedule:
-2-
Colum I
Coltml II
Petitioner g BANK OF AMERICA, LESSEE,
File No: D-W-U- 3
Column III Column IV Column V
r .
Extent
Town Wf-\PPINGER Or ig inal Claimed I Confirrre:i I Unequal
Village Valuation Valuation Valuation and/or
S.D. WAPPINGERS CSD Excessive
Sec. I Block I Lot
I I
Gr id : 19-6157-02-609919-0000 rand $ 160,000 $ * $
Total $ 350,000 $ 70,000 * $ 280,000
rand $ $ * $
Total $ .$ * $
Land $ $ * $
Total $ $ * $
-
. Land $ $ * $
Total $ $ * $
Land $ $ * $
Total $ $ * $
Land $ $ * $
Total $ $ * $
Land $ $ * $
Total $ $ * $
*Same as Colunn II except as otherwise indicated.
-3-
3. petitioner duly made and filed with respondents a written
application and statement under oath, to have said assessed
valuation of said real property corrected and revised, specifying
therein the respect in which the assessment complained of was
incorrect, and which application and statement sought to reduce
the assessment complained of as set forth in Column III Paragraph
2, Page 3. The application and statement are hereby referred to
and made part hereof as though fully set forth herein.
4. Upon information and belief, a final decision and
determination on the application and statement were duly rendered
by respondents who failed to reduce the assessment as requested
and confirmed the assessed valuation of petitioner's property as
set forth in Column IV Paragraph 2, Page 3.
5. Thirty days have not elapsed since the filing of the certified
copy of the completed and verified assessment roll as required by
law.
6. The assessment of petitioner's property is erroneous upon the
following grounds, as more fully defined in R.P.T.L. ~522 which is
incorporated by reference herein: (a) Excessive (to the extent set
forth in Column V Paragraph 2, Page 3) (b) Unequal (to the extent
set forth in Column V Paragraph 2, Page 3). The assessed value is
at a higher percentage of value than the assessed value of all
other real property on the same assessment roll. The specified
instances of such unequal assessment is the assessments of all of
the real property in the assessing jurisdiction and each and every
parcel thereof; and (c) Unlawful in that this property and all real
property In the assessing unit is not assessed at a uniform
percentage of value as required by R. P. T. L. ~ 305 (2), and/or
contrary to R.P.T.L. ~502 Form of Assessment Roll, and/or contrary
to R.P.T.L. ~550(2) Clerical Error, and/or R.P.T.L. ~550(3) Error
of Essential Fact, and/or R.P.T.L. ~550(7) Unlawful Entry, and/or
R.P.T.L. ~302 Taxable Status Date.
-4-
7. In the event that the assessment at issue has or should have a
R.P.T.L. ~485-b Business Exemption and petitioner's property has failed
to receive all or a portion of the R.P.T.L. ~485-b (business
investment) exemption or other partial exemptions to which it is
enti tled, or that respondents have failed to properly calculate such
exemptions, the assessment should be reduced as excessive, unequal and
unlawful.
8. Petitioner is aggrieved and injured by said unequal, excessive,
illegal, unlawful, and/or erroneous assessment (as defined in R.P.T.L.
~522), and will be required to pay a greater amount and proportion of
taxes than petitioner would be required to pay if the assessment had been
equal and not excessive, llegal, unlawful and/or erroneous.
9. No provision is made by law for an appeal or other relief from the
final determination of the respondents except by a review by petition to
the Supreme Court. No previous application for the relief herein asked
has been made to any court or judge.
10. If there is more than one petitioner herein, the word "petitioner"
shall mean "petitioners" or "each of the petitioners", and if there is
more than one tax lot and assessment herein, the word "assessment" shall
mean "assessments" or "each of the assessments", and as used herein the
singular shall include the plural and the plural shall include the
singular, as the context requires.
WHEREFORE, petitioner prays that the Supreme Court review and correct on
the merits, the final determination of respondents on the grounds set
forth in this petition, and that the Court take evidence to enable
petitioner to show the unjust, unequal, excessive, unlawful, illegal and
erroneous assessment of the real property to the end that the assessment
may be reduced to the full, true and market value thereof for land and
improvements, and to a valuation proportionate to the assessments of all
other property in the same assessment rolls for the same year, so that
equal i ty of assessments will result, and for such other and further
relief as the Court may deem proper, together with the statutory
interest, costs and disbursements of this proceedings.
DAVID G. KOCH, ESQ.
170 OLD COUNTRY ROAD
MINEOLA, NEW YORK 11501
(516) 294-9710
-5-
p:\docs\upstate\page4.5
AUTHORIZATION
The undersigned, being an aggrieved person within the meaning of
the REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW, or an officer or partner of such
aggrieved person, hereby authorizes DAVID G. KOCH, ESQ., or any
attorney employed by such firm, to act as our agent to:
(1) Make and serve a statement (also known as a complaint or
protest) pursuant to Sections 512(1) and 524 of the RPTL,
specifying the respect in which the assessment of the property
listed below is excessive, unequal, unlawful or misclassified.
(2) Verify, serve and file a petition for review of real property
assessment pursuant to Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law.
(3) Such firm is authorized to represent the undersigned in all
proceedings before the Board of Assessment Review and the
Supreme Court of the State of New York, and all appeals
therefrom.
This authorization applies to the following property:
COUNTY: DUTCHESS
ADDRESS: 1272 Route 9, Wappingers Falls, NY
TOWN: WAPPINGER
VILLAGE: UNINCORPORATED
TOWN DESCRIPTION:
GRID: 19-6157-02-609919-0000
S.D.: WAPPINGERS CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
DATED: JANUARY 3, 2005
BANK OF AMERICA, LESSEE
PETITIONER
FILE NO: D-W-U-3
TERENC
PRESIDE
SUCCESSO
BY MERGER
FARRELL, SENIOR VICE
ANK OF AMERICA AS
IN INTEREST TO FLEET BANK
BY:
Index No. c2b{)O-!;OltJ1
Year 2005/06
D-W-U-3
NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT: COUNTY OF DUTCHESS
BANK OF AMERICA, LESSEE,
Petitioner,
- against -
THE ASSESSOR OF THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER, AND THE BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER,
Respondents.
&
~ !<<<~
r#,c, 0 .io
~v O<l:- '\ ~'V
~ ~ca ~
~~
~ ~
NOTICE AND PETITION
DAVID G. KOCH, ESQ. Attorney for Petitioner
170 Old Country Road
Mineola, New York 11501 (516) 294-9710
VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF NASSAU
ss. :
The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
that
deponent is the agent for the petitioner herein, that deponent
has read the foregoing petition and knows the contents
thereof; that the same is true to deponent's own knowledge,
except as to matters therein stated to be alleged upon
information and belief, and that as to those matters, deponent
believes it to be true; and that the reason this verification
is made by deponent and not by petitioner is that all the
m'ater ial allegations (except those as to matters of public.
record) of said petition are within the personal knowledge of
deponent.
Sworn to before me this 6th
day of July,' 2005
e:.ti I >1;,,( (',Yr.ld: 4 (~,-~
NOTARY PUBLIC
CHRISTINE D. BENEDETTO
NOTARY PUBLIC, State of f-Jew York
No. 4866436
Qualified in Nassau County. .
Commission Expires Aug. 4, ~
-7-