From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gleason v. Town of Carmel

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 20, 2019
170 A.D.3d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

2016–08566 Index No. 1527/15

03-20-2019

In the Matter of Richard GLEASON, Appellant, v. TOWN OF CARMEL, Respondent.

Peter J. Gleason, P.C., Mahopac, NY, for appellant. Blancato Law Offices, P.C., Tarrytown, N.Y. (Richard T. Blancato of counsel), for respondent.


Peter J. Gleason, P.C., Mahopac, NY, for appellant.

Blancato Law Offices, P.C., Tarrytown, N.Y. (Richard T. Blancato of counsel), for respondent.

MARK C. DILLON, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner, the owner of certain real property in Carmel, applied to the respondent, Town of Carmel, for the alternative veterans exemption from real property taxation pursuant to RPTL 458–a on the basis that he was a veteran within the meaning of the statute. On November 26, 2014, the Town's Assessor denied the petitioner's application for the exemption. On May 26, 2015, the Town's Board of Assessment Review (hereinafter the Board) affirmed the Assessor's denial. In July 2015, the petitioner commenced this proceeding to review the Board's determination. The Town moved for summary judgment dismissing the petition on the ground that the petitioner did not qualify for the alternative veterans exemption provided by RPTL 458–a. The Supreme Court granted the Town's motion, denied the petition, and dismissed the proceeding. The petitioner appeals.

We agree with the Supreme Court's determination granting the Town's motion for summary judgment dismissing the petition, and dismissing the proceeding. The documents submitted by the petitioner in support of his application and petition, while indicating that his service with the United States Coast Guard for three separate periods in 1991, 1992, and 1993 was for "active duty training," failed to establish that such active duty training periods qualified for the tax exemption pursuant to RPTL 458–a(1)(e) (see General Construction Law § 13–a ; Matter of La Rocca v. Bronstein, 44 A.D.2d 668, 354 N.Y.S.2d 437 ).

DILLON, J.P., COHEN, DUFFY and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Gleason v. Town of Carmel

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 20, 2019
170 A.D.3d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Gleason v. Town of Carmel

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Richard Gleason, appellant, v. Town of Carmel, respondent.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Mar 20, 2019

Citations

170 A.D.3d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
170 A.D.3d 1016
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 2094