Legal Opinion
Svenningsen v. Passidomo
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 29, 1984PublishedCited by 9 opinions
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs (see 95 AD2d 833).
Petitioners own real property located partly in the City of Rye and partly in the Town of Harrison. They pay real property taxes to both municipalities and to the Town of Harrison School District. The property also lies within the Mamaroneck Valley Sewer District, which includes Harrison’s sewer system, and petitioners pay sewer taxes to Westchester County, the Mamaroneck Valley Sewer District and the Town/Village of Harrison Sewer District Number 1. A one-story masonry…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Belle Harbor Realty Corp. v. KerrNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Bologno v. O'ConnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Town of Lima v. HarperAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
- Harper v. Zoning Board of AppealsNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Svenningsen v. PassidomoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
3Cited by9 opinions
- Clubside, Inc. v. ValentinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Miller v. KozakiewiczAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Northway 11 Communities, Inc. v. Town Board of MaltaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Clubside, Inc. v. Town BoardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Incorporated Village of Babylon v. John Anthony's Water Cafe, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.