Case Name: In the Matter of Continental Can Company, Inc., et al., Respondents, v. Board of Assessors of the Village of Piermont, Appellant; In the Matter of Continental Can Company, Inc., et al., Respondents, v. Rudolph G. Behrendt et al., Constituting the Board of Assessment Review of the Town of Orangetown, Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1981-09-21
Citations: 83 A.D.2d 950
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Continental Can Company, Inc., et al., Respondents, v Board of Assessors of the Village of Piermont, Appellant. In the Matter of Continental Can Company, Inc., et al., Respondents, v Rudolph G. Behrendt et al., Constituting the Board of Assessment Review of the Town of Orangetown, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 83
Pages: 950–951

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Continental Can Company, Inc., et al., Respondents, v Board of Assessors of the Village of Piermont, Appellant. In the Matter of Continental Can Company, Inc., et al., Respondents, v Rudolph G. Behrendt et al., Constituting the Board of Assessment Review of the Town of Orangetown, Appellants.

Opinion:
In consolidated proceedings pursuant to article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law to review assessments on real property, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Sullivan, J.), entered April 24, 1980, reducing the assessments for each of the years in issue. By stipulation dated May 29, 1981, the appeal with respect to the Continental Can Company property has been withdrawn. The appeal as to the Federal Paper Board Company, Inc., property is not affected by that stipulation. Judgment affirmed insofar as it relates to the Federal Paper Board Company property, without costs or disbursements. With respect to the Federal Paper Board Company property, we conclude that Special Term's decision was amply supported by the record and that appellants have not established that the transaction in issue was not arm's length, bona fide and entitled to the weight given it. We find no merit to appellants' other contentions. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Titone and Weinstein, JJ., concur.