What did the court decide in simple terms?

The court ruled that Suffolk County may charge and collect hotel/motel occupancy taxes on the plaintiff’s short-term rentals of her Ocean Beach property, including stays under 30 days.

Who is affected by this decision?

Property owners who rent residences in Suffolk County for short-term stays like the plaintiff, and the county tax authority, are affected because such rentals can be subject to the occupancy tax.

What happens next after this decision?

The case is sent back to the Supreme Court for entry of a judgment declaring that the Comptroller may assess the taxes, and the Comptroller may proceed with tax assessments consistent with that judgment.

On what legal grounds did the court base its decision?

The court relied on the state statute granting counties broad authority to impose occupancy taxes and found that the statutory and county code definitions of “hotel or motel” include the plaintiff’s short-term rentals.

Can this decision be appealed further?

Yes; as an Appellate Division decision, the losing party may seek leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals, subject to that court's discretionary review rules.

Gorelick v. Suffolk County Comptroller's Off.

Docket 2022-06208

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

CivilAffirmed

Filed: Apr 29, 2026 · 2 days ago
Jurisdiction: New York
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Type: Opinion
Case type: Civil
Disposition: Affirmed
Citation: 2026 NY Slip Op 02632
Docket: 2022-06208

Appeal from an order granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing a CPLR article 78 proceeding (converted to an action for declaratory judgment) challenging hotel/motel tax assessments.

Summary

The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s grant of summary judgment to the Suffolk County Comptroller in an action converted from a CPLR article 78 proceeding. The court held that Suffolk County may assess hotel and motel occupancy taxes under chapter 523, article II of the Suffolk County Code on the plaintiff’s Fire Island rental property for stays of under 30 consecutive days. The court reasoned that the state enabling statute grants broad authority to impose an occupancy tax and that the statutory and local definitions of “hotel or motel” are sufficiently broad to include the plaintiff’s short-term rentals.

Issues Decided

Whether Suffolk County may lawfully assess hotel and motel occupancy taxes on the plaintiff's rental property for rental periods of less than 30 consecutive days under chapter 523, article II of the Suffolk County Code.
Whether the definitions of “hotel or motel” in the state enabling statute and the Suffolk County Hotel and Motel Occupancy Tax Law encompass the plaintiff’s short-term residential rentals.

Court's Reasoning

The court relied on the state statute that authorizes counties to impose an occupancy tax and recognized that the enabling language provides broad authority to enact such taxes. It found the statutory definition of “hotel or motel” expansive enough to cover rentals for less than 30 consecutive days, and held that the County Code's definitions are consistent with that enabling statute. Because the legal definitions encompass the plaintiff’s rental activity, the Comptroller was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Authorities Cited

Tax Law § 1202-o
Expedia, Inc. v City of N.Y. Dept. of Fin.22 NY3d 121
Matter of Schneider v Schuyler County140 AD3d 1373
Code of Suffolk County §§ 523-9, 523-10(B)(1)

Parties

Appellant: Joanne Gorelick
Respondent: Suffolk County Comptroller's Office
Judge: Hector D. Lasalle, P.J.
Judge: Francesca E. Connolly
Judge: Lourdes M. Ventura
Judge: Elena Goldberg Velazquez
Attorney: Christopher J. Clayton (County Attorney); Drew W. Schirmer (of counsel)

Key Dates

Decision date: 2026-04-29
Supreme Court order (studied on appeal) date: 2022-07-05
Index/Action start year: 2017-01-01

What You Should Do Next

1
Entry of judgment in Supreme Court
The matter is remitted so the Supreme Court should enter a judgment declaring that the Comptroller may assess the occupancy tax on the property.
2
Evaluate tax exposure and compliance
Affected property owners should calculate prior and prospective occupancy-tax liabilities and consider registering with the Comptroller to remit taxes and avoid penalties.
3
Consider seeking further review
If the appellant wishes to continue, she should consult counsel about applying for leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals within applicable deadlines.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide in simple terms?: The court ruled that Suffolk County may charge and collect hotel/motel occupancy taxes on the plaintiff’s short-term rentals of her Ocean Beach property, including stays under 30 days.
Who is affected by this decision?: Property owners who rent residences in Suffolk County for short-term stays like the plaintiff, and the county tax authority, are affected because such rentals can be subject to the occupancy tax.
What happens next after this decision?: The case is sent back to the Supreme Court for entry of a judgment declaring that the Comptroller may assess the taxes, and the Comptroller may proceed with tax assessments consistent with that judgment.
On what legal grounds did the court base its decision?: The court relied on the state statute granting counties broad authority to impose occupancy taxes and found that the statutory and county code definitions of “hotel or motel” include the plaintiff’s short-term rentals.
Can this decision be appealed further?: Yes; as an Appellate Division decision, the losing party may seek leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals, subject to that court's discretionary review rules.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

Gorelick v Suffolk County Comptroller's Off. - 2026 NY Slip Op 02632

Gorelick v Suffolk County Comptroller's Off.

2026 NY Slip Op 02632

April 29, 2026

Appellate Division, Second Department

Joanne Gorelick, appellant,

Suffolk County Comptroller's Office, respondent.

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Decided on April 29, 2026

2022-06208, (Index No. 273/17)

Hector D. Lasalle, P.J.

Francesca E. Connolly

Lourdes M. Ventura

Elena Goldberg Velazquez, JJ.

Joanne Gorelick, Kendall Park, New Jersey, appellant pro se.

Christopher J. Clayton, County Attorney, Hauppauge, NY (Drew W. Schirmer of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, which was converted into an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that the defendant is prohibited from assessing taxes pursuant to chapter 523, article II, of the Code of Suffolk County on the plaintiff's property in Ocean Beach for rental periods of less than 30 consecutive days, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Joseph A. Santorelli, J.), dated July 5, 2022. The order granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and for a declaration in its favor.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for the entry of a judgment, inter alia, declaring that the defendant is not prohibited from assessing taxes pursuant to chapter 523, article II, of the Code of Suffolk County on the plaintiff's property located at 845 Evergreen Walk, Ocean Beach, for rental periods of less than 30 consecutive days.

The plaintiff owns a house in the Village of Ocean Beach, on Fire Island, which she rents to guests for minimum stays of seven days.

In 2016, the defendant, Suffolk County Comptroller's Office (hereinafter the Comptroller), notified the plaintiff that she was required to pay hotel and motel taxes on rentals of the property for periods of less than 30 consecutive days, pursuant to chapter 523, article II, of the Code of Suffolk County (hereinafter the Suffolk County Hotel and Motel Occupancy Tax Law).

In January 2017, the plaintiff commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding against the Comptroller, inter alia, to prohibit the Comptroller from assessing hotel and motel occupancy taxes on the property. The plaintiff primarily contended that she did not rent the property on an overnight basis and that it was not a hotel. The Supreme Court converted this CPLR article 78 proceeding into an action for a declaratory judgment, pursuant to CPLR 103(c).

The Comptroller subsequently moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and for a judgment declaring that the property is subject to the Suffolk County Hotel and Motel Occupancy Tax Law. The plaintiff opposed the motion. The Supreme Court granted the
motion, and the plaintiff appeals.

The Supreme Court did not err in awarding the Comptroller summary judgment dismissing the complaint and in determining that the Comptroller was entitled to a declaration in its favor as a matter of law. The Legislature authorized Suffolk County to impose a tax upon persons occupying hotel or motel rooms in the County (
see
Tax Law § 1202-o[1]). This statute granted "broad authority to enact an occupancy tax" (
Expedia, Inc. v City of N.Y. Dept. of Fin.
, 22 NY3d 121, 127;
see Matter of Schneider v Schuyler County
, 140 AD3d 1373, 1376). The definition of "hotel or motel" in the enabling statute is expansive enough to include the plaintiff's rental of the property for periods of time less than 30 consecutive days (
see
Tax Law § 1202-o[1]), and the definition of "hotel or motel" set forth in the Suffolk County Hotel and Motel Occupancy Tax Law (
see
Code of Suffolk County §§ 523-9, 523-10[B][1]) is consistent with the authorizing statutory language (
see

Matter of Schneider v Schuyler County
, 140 AD3d at 1376;
cf.

County of Nassau v Expedia, Inc.
, 189 AD3d 1346).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are not properly before this Court.

LASALLE, P.J., CONNOLLY, VENTURA and GOLDBERG VELAZQUEZ, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph