Floreza Realty Corp. v. Miele
Opinion of the Court
—In a proceeding
Ordered that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.
We agree with appellants that the Supreme Court improperly “abolished” the interest payments charged to the petitioner for delinquent real property taxes on the subject property. The petitioner does not dispute that it was improperly credited with having made certain tax payments on the subject property when tax payments meant for other parcels were credited to the subject property. Thus, the appellants were entitled to charge interest on the late tax payments (see, Administrative Code of City of NY § 11-224 [f]). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.