Filed Date: 11/5/2001
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
—In consolidated tax certiorari proceedings pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7, to review certain real property tax assessments on the petitioner’s property, the intervenor Nanuet Union Free School District appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Palella, J.), entered December 22, 1998, which so-ordered a stipulation of settlement entered into by the petitioner, American Cyanamid Co. (Lederle Labs), the respondents Board of Assessors and/or the Assessor of the Town of Orangetown and the Board of Assessment Review, and the intervenor County of Rockland.
Ordered that on the Court’s own motion, the notice of appeal is treated as an application for leave to appeal, and leave to appeal is granted (see, CPLR 5701 [c]); and it is further, Ordered that the order is affirmed; and it is farther,
Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The petitioner owns and operates a large pharmaceutical research and manufacturing complex on certain real property (hereinafter the subject property), which is located in the Town of Orangetown, Rockland County. The petitioner commenced a series of tax certiorari proceedings against the Board of Assessors and/or the Assessor of the Town of Orangetown and the Board of Assessment Review of the Town of Orangetown (hereinafter collectively referred to as the Town) pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7, challenging the assessments of the subject property. The appellant, Nanuet Union Free School District (hereinafter Nanuet UFSD), intervened in each of the proceedings. At issue on the instant appeal is whether the Supreme Court properly so-ordered, and thereby in effect approved, a stipulation of settlement, dated November 11, 1998, between the petitioner, the Town, and the County of Rockland, which proposed to settle the 1997/1998 proceeding, and to set a framework for the possible settlement of the remaining proceedings, as well as for avoiding challenges to future assessments up to and including the assessment for 2005-2006.
On appeal, Nanuet UFSD contends, inter alia, that the so-ordered stipulation of settlement is unconstitutional as in violation of New York State Constitution, article XVI, § 1 because it “limits the ability of the taxing authorities to tax the petitioner in excess of $11,500,000 for the next eight years,” and “calls for the taxing authorities to suspend their power to tax the petitioner.” The contention is without merit.
The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J. P., Friedmann, Smith and Adams, JJ., concur.