Summary judgment is, we all know, a drastic remedy that should only be granted if it is clear that no material issues of fact have been presented. Issue finding, rather than issue determination, is the court’s function. The application will be denied if there is any doubt about the existence of a triable issue of fact or if a material issue of fact is arguable. It is rare to see summary judgment in a real estate valuation case. Yet, in Matter of Barnett v. Assessor, Town of Carmel (Index No. 1612/2006), NYLJ, Jan. 27, 2010, p. 30, Col. 3, Justice John R. LaCava granted a petitioner in a tax assessment case summary judgment where the taxpayer alleged that the town selectively reassessed the residential property in question from $150,000 to $240,000.

Selective Reassessment

Justice LaCava noted that where a petitioner alleges a change in assessment in a tax year in which there is no municipal-wide reassessment, the assessor is required to provide an explanation of both the change in assessment on petitioner’s parcel and his assessment methodology in general. He noted that “this court has also frequently examined municipal re-evaluations and found that the assessor’s explanations of the changes were either lacking, or non-existent.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]