Opinion
March 5, 1962
In consolidated proceedings to review assessments of certain real property in the Village of Hempstead, the village officials appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated August 18, 1960, as: (1) denied their motion to dismiss the petitions of William T. Hutcheson and Jerome C. Mayer to review the assessed valuations of their real property for the year 1959, on the ground that said petitioners did not verify their petitions, as required under section 290-c Tax of the Tax Law and section 706 Real Prop. Tax of the Real Property Tax Law; and (2) granted said petitioners' cross motion for leave to amend their petitions so as to supply such verifications either by petitioners themselves or their agents. Order, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. "The Tax Law relating to review of assessments is remedial in character and should be liberally construed to the end that the taxpayer's right to have his assessment reviewed should not be defeated by a technicality" ( People ex rel. New York City Omnibus Corp. v. Miller, 282 N.Y. 5, 9; People ex rel. Denney v. Clark, 257 App. Div. 905). A petition is akin to a complaint in an action, and is amendable on motion. It is our opinion that under section 105 of the Civil Practice Act, the omission of the verification, which "adds nothing" to the petition ( People ex rel. Denney v. Clark, supra), is an omission or irregularity which, in the discretion of the court, may be supplied or corrected if, as here, it appears that no substantial right of any party is prejudiced thereby. Beldock, P.J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.