Rotterdam Square v. Town of Rotterdam
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Vito C. Caruso, J.
In these two CPLR article 78 proceedings, petitioner seeks: (1) to compel respondents to issue a tax refund for tax year 1998, (2) to hold them in contempt for failing to do so, and (3) to consolidate the two proceedings. Respondents oppose the article 78 relief and the contempt application and, in addition, respondent County of Schenectady and its named representatives (hereinafter collectively referred to as the County) cross-move to dismiss the contempt portion. Petitioner does not oppose the County’s motion and it is accordingly granted. No opposition…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Nassau Trust Co. v. Montrose Concrete Products Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Bank v. MurphyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Kromer v. KromerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
3Cited by1 opinion
- Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Town of Floyd AssessorNew York Supreme Court · 2001