Case Name: The People of the State of New York ex rel. George P. Fiske and Frederick B. Fiske, Appellants, v. Thomas L. Feitner and Others, as Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of the City of New York, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1904
Citations: 95 A.D. 217
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York ex rel. George P. Fiske and Frederick B. Fiske, Appellants, v. Thomas L. Feitner and Others, as Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of the City of New York, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 95
Pages: 217–218

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York ex rel. George P. Fiske and Frederick B. Fiske, Appellants, v. Thomas L. Feitner and Others, as Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of the City of New York, Respondents.
Inequality of a tax assessment — what proof is required to establish it.
Inequality in an assessment for the purposes of taxation, must, in order to constitute a ground for relief by certiorari under section 250 of the Tax Law (Laws of 1896, chap. 908), be something more than a valuation disproportionate to that placed upon a few other pieces of property in the same vicinity.
If the relator’s assessment is not out of proportion, as compared with valuations generally upon the same assessment roll, it is immaterial that some particular-neighbor is assessed too little and another too much.
Appeal by the relators,. George P.. Fiske and another, from an -order of the Supreme Court, made át the Kings County Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the pounty of Kings on the 6th day of December, 1903, dismissing, a writ of certiorari and confirming an assessment theretofore made by the respondent's.
Frederic R. Kellogg, for the appellants.
George S. Coleman [Henry C. Johnson with him on the brief], for the respondents.

Opinion:
Willard Bartlett, J.:
Inequality ás a ground for relief by certiorari under the Tax Law (Laws of' 1896, chap. 908, § 250 et.seq.) must be something more than a valuation disproportionate- to that placed upon a few other pieces of property in the same vicinity. This is the most that the proof in behalf of the relators can be held to have established- in the present case. If one's own assessment "is not out of proportion as compared with valuations generally on the same roll, it is immaterial that somemne neighbor is assessed too little and another too much." (Cooley Taxn. [2d ed.] 410.) This doctrine has been adopted by the Court of Appeals in construing chapter 269 of the Laws of 1880 from which the certiorari provisions of the present Tax Law are -derived. (People ex rel. Warren v. Carter, 109 N. Y. 576, 581; People ex rel. Allen v. Badgley, 138 id. 314, 317.) It is fatal to the case of the, appellants. .
Moreover, I agree with the-opinion expressed by Mr. Justice Gaynor at Special Term that the comparison made by the relators is with property not in the same circumstances or category with their own.
The order should be affirmed.
All concurred.
Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.