Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: BETHELITE COMMUNITY CHURCH, GREAT TOMORROWS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, Petitioner-Respondent, v. The DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents-Appellants.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered January 12, 2005, which granted the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to compel the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to grant petitioner an exemption from water and sewer charges, reverse DEP's assessments, charges and penalties against it, and abate any tax liens arising from those assessments, charges and penalties, and denied respondents' cross motion to dismiss the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Petitioner is entitled to an exemption from the payment of water and sewer charges pursuant to statute. Although the statute provides that the premises must be used “exclusively” for religious or educational purposes to qualify for the exemption and there are residences within petitioner's church, those residences are for the church administrator and a teacher employed by the church's school and thus are incidental to the main and exempt uses and purposes of the property. Accordingly, they do not defeat the exemption (see L. 1887, ch. 696, as amended by L. 1980, ch. 893; RPTL § 420-a; Matter of Yeshivath Shearith Hapletah v. Assessor of Town of Fallsburg, 79 N.Y.2d 244, 582 N.Y.S.2d 54, 590 N.E.2d 1182 [1992] ). The court properly rendered a decision on the merits without awaiting respondent's answer, under the particular circumstances presented, most notably the pending foreclosure upon petitioner's property based upon liens for unpaid water and sewer charges notwithstanding petitioner's clear statutory entitlement to an exemption from such charges. The grounds for respondents' opposition to the petition were sufficiently set forth in their cross motion to dismiss (see Matter of Davila v. New York City Hous. Auth., 190 A.D.2d 511, 593 N.Y.S.2d 12 [1993], lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 801, 637 N.Y.S.2d 688, 661 N.E.2d 160 [1995] ).
We have considered respondents' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 09, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)