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.
KEYSPAN GAS EAST CORPORATION, etc., Plaintiff, v. SUPERVISOR OF TOWN OF NORTH HEMPSTEAD, et al., Defendants Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents; County of Nassau, et al., Third-Party Defendants-Appellants.
DECISION & ORDER
In a consolidated action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that the imposition of special ad valorem levies for garbage and refuse collection services against certain “mass” properties owned by the plaintiff is illegal and void, the third-party defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roy S. Mahon, J.), entered August 29, 2016. The judgment, insofar as appealed from, is in favor of the defendants third-party plaintiffs and against the third-party defendants in the principal sum of $2,486,923.80.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Based upon the Court of Appeals' holding that Nassau County, on behalf of its towns and their ancillary bodies, could not impose special ad valorem levies for garbage service on utility mass property (see New York Tel. Co. v. Supervisor of Town of Oyster Bay, 4 N.Y.3d 387, 392–395, 796 N.Y.S.2d 7, 828 N.E.2d 964), the plaintiff, Keyspan Gas East Corporation (hereinafter Keyspan), commenced six related actions seeking refunds of the levies for the tax years 2002 through 2007 from the defendants, Town of North Hempstead and various of ancillary bodies thereof (hereinafter collectively the Town). The Town thereafter commenced third-party actions against the County seeking indemnification pursuant to Nassau County Administrative Code § 6–26.0(b)(3)(c). The actions were subsequently consolidated.
The Town moved, inter alia, for summary judgment on the third-party complaint and the County cross-moved pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the third-party complaint or, in the alternative, for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint. In an order entered December 18, 2015, the Supreme Court denied the County's motion and granted that branch of the Town's motion which was for summary judgment on the third-party complaint. The court entered judgment in favor of the Town and against the County in the principal sum of $2,486,923.80. The County appeals from the judgment, which brings up for review the order entered December 18, 2015.
For the reasons stated in Verizon New York, Inc. v. Supervisors of Town of Hempstead, 169 A.D.3d 740, 93 N.Y.S.3d 357, 2019 WL 453961 (Appellate Division Docket No. 2015–08548; decided herewith), we agree with the Supreme Court's determination granting that branch of the Town's motion which was for summary judgment on the third-party complaint, denying the County's motion, and entering judgment in favor of the Town.
DILLON, J.P., BARROS, IANNACCI and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.
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.
Docket No: 2016–10588
Decided: February 06, 2019
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)