Mehran & Sepideh Manouel v Board of Assessors

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Mehran & Sepideh Manouel v Board of Assessors 2011 NY Slip Op 34171(U) December 16, 2011 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 5790/11 Judge: Antonio I. Brandveen Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various state and local government websites. These include the New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service, and the Bronx County Clerk's office. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. ........................ . . .. . . . . . . .. ..... .. .. .. .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [* 1] SHORT FORM ORDER SUPREME COURT - STATE OF NEW YORK Present: ANTONIO I. BRANDVEEN 1. S. C. MEHRN & SEPIDEH MANOUEL TRIAL / IAS PART30 NASSAU COUNTY Petitioners Index No. 5790/11 against Motion Sequence No. 001 , 002 BOAR OF ASSESSORS and ASSESSMENT REVIEW COMMSSION OF THE COUNTY NASSAU, Respondents. . The following papers having been read on this motion: Notice of Motion , Affidavits , & Exhibits 1.2 Answering Affdavits Replying Affidavits. . . . . . . . . . . Briefs: Plaintiffs/Petitioner Defendant's / Respondent's. . . . The petitioners seek to vacate a December 17, 2010 Small Claims Review Assessment determination , to find they qualify for SCAR jurisdiction under the Real Propert Tax Law , to remand the petition for a de novo hearing before another hearing offcer and to award costs and disbursements. The petitioners contend the determination was not rationally based. The petitioners claim they are entitled because the petitioner Mehran Manouel's mother resides rent free at the subject propert. The respondents move to dismiss. The respondents point out the Real Propert Tax [* 2] Law requires owner occupied propert to qualify for SCAR, and an exception applies only in narrow circumstances. The respondents assert the petitioners do not fit an exception. The respondents aver income production argument as espoused by the petitioners or the lack of it has no relevance upon SCAR eligibility. The petitioners reply the respondents fail to provide facts or law. The petitioners reiterate their previous contentions regarding owner occupancy. This Court carefully considered the parties ' papers. The Second Deparment holds: (H)earings held pursuant to the Small Claims Assessment Review procedure are to be conducted on an informal basis , and the hearing officer is vested with the discretion to consider a wide variety of sources and information (Matter of Meirowitz v. Board of Assessors 53 A. D.3d at 550 Matter of Barbera v. Assessor of 861 N. 2d 366) Town of Pelham 278 A. 2d 412 , 717 N. Sass v. Town of Brookhaven 73 AD3d 785 , 787- 788. S.2d 414; see RPTL 732 (2); The Second Deparment also holds: The Real Propert Tax Law provides that hearings held pursuant to the Small Claims Assessment Review procedure are to be conducted on an informal basis , and it vests the Judicial Hearing Officer with the discretion to consider a wide variety of sources and information in evaluating tax Matter of McNamara v. Board of (see Matter of Sauer v. Board of Assessors 272 A. 2d 617 , 709 N. 2d 557). When the Judicial Hearing Assessors 194 A. 2d 542 , 598 N. Offcer s determination is contested , the court' s role is limited to assessments RPTL 732(2); 2d 821; (see, Matter of McNamara v. Board of Assessors, supra; Matter of Meola v. Assessor ascertaining whether that determination has a rational basis 2d 506) 615 N. Barbera v. Assessor of the Town of Pelham 278 AD2d 412 Board of Assessors 272 AD2d 617. Town of Colon ie 207 A. 2d 593 , The hearing officer here found the subject propert Page 2 of 3 413; see also McNamara v. was not owner occupied , and the [* 3] petitioners did not qualify under an exception to the owner occupancy requirement of SCAR. The respondents ' show the petitioners provided no evidence the subject propert is for sale and no indication the mother s current occupancy is a temporar arangement. That showing provided a rational basis for the determination that SCAR jurisdiction under the Real Propert Tax Law was not waranted. Moreover , the hearing officer rationally applied an actual owner occupancy rather than income production. The determination was not arbitrar and capricious. The Court notes any change in the jurisdictional requirements of SCAR are the province of the New York Legislature. Accordingly, the respondents ' motion is granted. The petition is denied. The determination is confirmed , and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits. This decision shall constitute the judgment and order of the Court. So ordered. Dated: December 16, 2011 ENTER: 1. S. C. ENTERED FINAL DISPOSITION DEC 20 2011 NASSAU COUNTY COUNTY CLERK' S OFFICE Page 3 of 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.