1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Misc.2d
  4. 186 Misc.2d
  5. 186 Misc.2d 214 (2000)
 

ROTTERDAM SQ. v. ROTTERDAM

186 Misc.2d 214 (2000)

717 N.Y.S.2d 473

In the Matter of ROTTERDAM SQUARE, Petitioner, v. TOWN OF ROTTERDAM et al., Respondents. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of ROTTERDAM SQUARE, Petitioner, v. JOSEPH SIGNORE, as Supervisor of the Town of Rotterdam, et al., Respondents. (Proceeding No. 2.)

Supreme Court, Schenectady County.

October 13, 2000.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rowley, Forrest, O'Donnell & Beaumont, P. C., Albany, for Rotterdam Square, petitioner.

DeLorenzo, Pasquariello & Weiskopf, P. C., Schenectady, for Town of Rotterdam and others, respondents.

Hancock & Estabrook, Syracuse, for Schalmont Central School District and others, respondents.

Gordon, Siegel, Mastro, Mullaney, Gordon & Galvin, P. C., Latham, for County of Schenectady and others, respondents.

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...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases