AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

PRECISION DYNAMICS CORP., Appellant, v. TAX COMMISSION OF CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent.

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.2 [b]), order affirmed, with costs. The determination of market value essentially is a question of fact ( Grant Co. v Srogi, 52 N.Y.2d 496, 510). The Appellate Division considered all the elements which "go into the makeup of value" and, on this record, it cannot be said that its determination is erroneous as a matter of law. Indeed, any legal error that may have been made by the trial court in considering co-operative conversion potential as the sole indicator of value was corrected by the Appellate Division which accorded such potential little, if any, weight in its determination of valuation. We note that the newly enacted section 581 of the Real Property Tax Law, foreclosing consideration of conversion potential, is inapplicable to the present proceeding.

Concur: Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PRECISION DYNAMICS v. TAX COMM. OF CITY OF NEW YORK
(May 13, 1982)