Case ID: ny_302/html/0161-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      \n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York ex rel. 711 Corporation, Appellant, against Harry B. Chambers et al., Constituting the Tax Commission of the City of New York, Respondents.
    Argued January 10, 1951;
    decided January 18, 1951.
    
      
      Sidney S. Levine for appellant.
    It was reversible error for the Appellate Division to hold that relator had not made out a prima facie case. (People ex rel. Sheffield Farms Co. v. Lilly, 295 N. Y. 354; Matter of Levinson Corp. [Joint Bd. of Cloak, Suit, Skirt & Reefer Makers’ Union], 299 N. Y. 454; People ex rel. Manhattan Square Beresford, Inc., v. Sexton, 284 N. Y. 145; People ex rel. Van Rensselaer Estates, Inc., v. Goldfogle, 285 N. Y. 582.)
    
      John P. McGrath, Corporation Counsel (Morris Handel and Imre Schwarz of counsel), for respondents.
    Relator’s entire case, consisting of self-contradictory and factually unsupported opinion testimony by a single interested witness, was entitled to no credibility as a matter of law, particularly in view of the conclusive evidence in the record as to sales, mortgage and actual earnings. (People ex rel. Wallington Apts., Inc., v. Miller, 288 N. Y. 31; Pollock v. Pollock, 71 N. Y. 137; Morison v. American Tel. & Tel. Co., 115 App. Div. 744; Matter of Fifth Madison Corp. [N. Y. Tel. Co.], 297 N. Y. 155.)
   Per Curiam.

Since the Appellate Division order fails to make the specifications required by section 602 of the Civil Practice Act, we are compelled to presume that questions of fact were not considered and to “ treat the Appellate Division order as being a determination on the law only ” (People ex rel. Sheffield Farms Co. v. Lilly, 295 N. Y. 354, 356; Rochette & Parzini Corp. v. Campo, 301 N. Y. 228). So regarded, the order cannot be sustained. Questions of fact as to the value of the premises during the taxable years in question are presented by the record. The order is accordingly reversed, without costs, and the matter remitted to the Appellate Division “ for determination upon the questions of fact raised in that court ” (Civ. Prac. Act, § 606).

Loughrae, Ch. J., Lewis, Coeway, Desmoed, Dye, Fuld and Froessel, JJ., concur.

Ordered accordingly.