Opinion
2016–08566 Index No. 1527/15
03-20-2019
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.