Judges: Conlon
Filed Date: 10/22/1959
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
Although the sale price, rather than the assessed valuation, must ordinarily be used as the valuation base, this is not mandatory if the sale was not ‘1 at arm’s length ’ ’ or was affected by ‘ ‘ special circumstances ’ ’. In the instant case, the evidence established (1) that Eellstab, the present owner of the stock of the landlord corporation, acquired the same by purchases of one half from one stockholder, on November 30,
This evidence was wholly uncontradicted. It permitted the Rent Administrator to find that the sale was not “ at arm’s length ” but rather one where wealthy, close personal friends of Rellstab decided to turn over the property to him at their original cost. The Administrator might also find, on this evidence, that special circumstances existed which rendered the prices paid by Rellstab, at times almost half a year apart, for separate half interests in the property, of little worth as indices of the value of the property. In this connection it is pertinent to quote the definition of “at arm’s length” in Funk & Wagnall’s New Standard Dictionary: “At an unfriendly distance, as by cold or distant treatment ”.
Other evidence submitted by the landlord tends to confirm the view that Rockefeller and Todd, in conveying the property to Rellstab at their original cost, did not attempt to obtain what they considered to be the market value thereof. Thus, only a few days after Rellstab had acquired the property and the mortgages and notes for about $205,000, the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company took a first mortgage of $180,000 on the property — an indication of an appraised value of about $300,000. The assessed valuation is $370,967.26.
In these circumstances, the court is unable to hold that the Rent Administrator’s determination that the sale was not at arm’s length and, in addition, was affected by special circumstances, was arbitrary, whimsical or capricious. On the contrary, there is substantial evidence to support it. As the court may not substitute its judgment for that of the Administrator, but may at most set aside his determination if it is without substantial .basis, this motion is denied.