Court Opinion

ID: 9899080
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-15 20:08:05.562182+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:33.050555
License: Public Domain

Matter of Coscia v Town of Greenburgh (2023 NY Slip Op 05730)

Matter of Coscia v Town of Greenburgh

2023 NY Slip Op 05730

Decided on November 15, 2023

Appellate Division, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 15, 2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
PAUL WOOTEN
DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.

2022-02705
 (Index No. 63077/16)

[*1]In the Matter of Anthony Coscia, appellant,
vTown of Greenburgh, etc., et al., respondents-respondents; Ardsley Union Free School District, intervenor respondent-respondent.

Goodfriend, Saltzman and Goodfriend, Suffern, NY (Mark F. Goodfriend of counsel), for appellant.

DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7 to review a real property tax assessment for the 2016 tax year, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bruce E. Tolbert, J.), dated March 15, 2022. The order and judgment granted the respondents' motion for summary judgment dismissing the petition, and dismissed the proceeding as untimely.
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
On September 19, 2016, the petitioner, the record owner of certain real property in Westchester County (hereinafter the property), commenced this proceeding against, among others, the Town of Greenburgh to challenge a 2016 tax assessment of the property which was finalized on November 7, 2016.
The respondents, the Town, its Assessor, and its Board of Assessment Review, and the intervenor-respondent, Ardsley Union Free School District (hereinafter collectively the respondents), jointly moved for summary judgment dismissing the petition on the ground that the proceeding was untimely and prematurely commenced. In an order and judgment dated March 15, 2022, the Supreme Court granted the respondents' motion, and dismissed the proceeding as untimely. The petitioner appeals.
For the reasons set forth in this Court's opinion and order on a related appeal (see Matter of Coscia v Town of Greenburgh, _____ AD3d _____ [Appellate Division Docket No. 2021-07969; decided herewith]), the Supreme Court properly granted the respondents' motion, and dismissed the proceeding as untimely.
DUFFY, J.P., CHAMBERS, WOOTEN and DOWLING, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Darrell M. Joseph
Acting Clerk of the Court