§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of John Gaied, Appellant,v.New York State Tax Appeals Tribunal, et al., Respondents.

Brief

7 Cited authorities

  1. Matter of Tamagni v. Tax Appeals Tribunal

    91 N.Y.2d 530 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 23 times   7 Legal Analyses
    In Matter of Tamagni v Tax Appeals Trib. of State of N.Y. (91 NY2d 530 [1998]), this Court examined the legislative history of the tax statute, and noted that there had been "several cases of multimillionaires who actually maintain homes in New York and spend ten months of every year in those homes... but... claim to be nonresidents" (91 NY2d at 535 quoting Income Tax Bureau Mem, Bill Jacket, L 1922, ch 425).

  2. Gaied v. N.Y. Tax Appeals Tribunal

    101 A.D.3d 1492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)   Cited 1 times   4 Legal Analyses

    2012-12-27 In the Matter of John GAIED, Petitioner, v. NEW YORK STATE TAX APPEALS TRIBUNAL et al., Respondents. Hodgson Russ, LLP, Albany (Timothy P. Noonan of counsel), for petitioner. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Robert M. Goldfarb of counsel), for Commissioner of Taxation and Finance, respondent. LAHTINEN Hodgson Russ, LLP, Albany (Timothy P. Noonan of counsel), for petitioner. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Robert M. Goldfarb of counsel), for Commissioner of

  3. In re El-Tersli v. Commr. of Tax. and Finance

    14 A.D.3d 808 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)   Cited 7 times

    93909 January 13, 2005. Crew III, J. Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (initiated in this Court pursuant to Tax Law § 2016) to review a determination of respondent Tax Appeals Tribunal which sustained a notice of deficiency. Before: Mercure, J.P., Spain, Carpinello and Kane, JJ., concur. Petitioner operates several hot dog carts in New York City and, at least until some point in 1989, resided with his spouse in an apartment at 145 West 85th Street in Manhattan. In June 1989, petitioner purchased

  4. Schibuk v. N.Y. State Tax Appeals Tribunal

    289 A.D.2d 718 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)   Cited 5 times

    85531 December 13, 2001. Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (initiated in this Court pursuant to Tax Law § 2016) to review a determination of respondent Tax Appeals Tribunal which, inter alia, sustained a personal income tax assessment imposed under Tax Law article 22. Norman Schibuk and Enid Schibuk, Moretown, Vermont, petitionerspro se. Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Laura Etlinger of counsel), Albany, for respondents. Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ. MEMORANDUM

  5. Matter of Evans v. Tax App. Tribunal of St.

    199 A.D.2d 840 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)   Cited 4 times   3 Legal Analyses

    December 30, 1993 Mercure, J. Petitioner was employed by Mobil Corporation at its headquarters in midtown Manhattan from 1977 through 1985 and 1986, the tax years at issue in this proceeding. In 1976 petitioner purchased a house in the Town of Pawling, Dutchess County, located about 70 miles outside of New York City. In 1978, to alleviate commuting into Manhattan on a daily basis, petitioner made arrangements to live with a friend, Father Vincent Ioppolo, at the rectory of the Episcopal Church of

  6. Matter of Smith v. State Tax Commission

    68 A.D.2d 993 (N.Y. App. Div. 1979)   Cited 2 times

    March 22, 1979 Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the State Tax Commission, which denied petitioners' application for a redetermination of a deficiency or for refund of personal income taxes imposed under article 22 of the Tax Law for the year 1970. Prior to July, 1970, petitioner Edward J. Smith and his wife, now deceased, resided in Granville, New York, and maintained

  7. Section 605 - General provisions and definitions

    N.Y. Tax Law § 605   Cited 45 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Classifying testamentary trusts as resident, and therefore taxable, only where testator was domiciled in New York at time of death