City of New Rochelle v. Echo Bay Waterfront Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtHagarty, J.
This action was instituted by the plaintiff pursuant to the provisions of article VTI-A, title 3, of the Tax Law.. The defendant is the owner of real property burdened with tax liens, and attacks, by way of defense, the constitutionality of the cited statute, which is captioned “ FORECLOSURE OF THE TAX LIEN BY ACTION IN REM.”
The substance of the main provisions of the statute is set forth in the opinion of Morehouse, J., in City of Utica v. Proite (178 Misc. 925, affd. 288 N. Y. 477). In general, the statute provides for the summary foreclosure of tax liens unpaid for a period of more than…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Hagar v. Reclamation District No. 108Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Stuart v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- North Laramie Land Co. v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Ballard v. HunterSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Huling v. Kaw Valley Railway & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- Hood River County v. DabneyOregon Supreme Court · 1967
- People v. Reilly, New York County Courts1976
- People v. Kirk, New York County Courts1969
- People v. LoftonNew York Supreme Court · 1975
- Shaffer v. Mareve Oil CorporationWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1974
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.