Editor’s note: the court situation is moving. This page reflects public reporting as of August 10, 2026, and will be updated as the case develops.

Case status as of August 10, 2026: temporary restraining order in effect; the City says it will appeal immediately; oral arguments scheduled for August 31.

On Monday, August 10, a Staten Island judge issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking the rollout of the surcharge New Yorkers call the pied-à-terre tax and the Department of Finance calls the non-primary residence surcharge. The order came in a lawsuit filed days earlier by homeowners who say the rollout flagged the wrong properties, including their own primary homes. If you received a notice in July, or found your property on the city’s published roll, the natural question is whether any of it still applies to you. The short answer: the order is real, the tax is still on the books, and the careful move is to act as if your deadlines still stand. For the surcharge itself, who pays and who qualifies for exemption, start with our full non-primary residence surcharge explainer.

What did the court actually order?

Justice Wayne Ozzi of the State Supreme Court in Richmond County issued the TRO on August 10 in O’Brien v. City of New York, Index No. 85217/2026. As reported by Gothamist, CBS New York and ABC7, while the court order is in effect:

• The city must take down the public roll of roughly 900,000 properties it had posted in connection with the surcharge.
• The order blocks the city from sending additional surcharge notices.
• The city cannot grant exemptions or determine that any owner is subject to the tax.
• For the roughly 17,000 owners who received the July notice, surcharge collection and enforcement are on hold.

The TRO holds at least until oral arguments, scheduled for August 31, unless the order is stayed on appeal before then, which City Hall says can happen as soon as the Law Department files.

Who filed the lawsuit?

Three Staten Island homeowners, Simon Hedley, Rachel O’Brien and Carmine Morano, filed the petition on August 7, represented by Randy Mastro of Dechert LLP. They say their homes are primary residences that the rollout swept in anyway, one of them onto the published roll. The case challenges how the surcharge was administered, the roll and the notices. It does not ask the court to strike down the tax law itself.

Is the pied-à-terre tax gone?

No. The statute, Article 30-C of the New York Tax Law, was not struck down, and the petition does not ask for that. What the court paused is the machinery: the roll, the notices, the determinations.

City Hall has said the Law Department will appeal immediately, and its position is that the appeal will put the order on hold and allow implementation to continue. If that happens, the process resumes where it stopped. If the surcharge proceeds, it is still scheduled to appear for the first time on the January 1, 2027 property tax bill.

Does the court order change the September 18 deadline?

As of this writing, no change to the September 18 exemption filing date has been reported. September 18 is the extended date announced August 1; it replaced the August 21 and August 24 dates printed on the July notices.

Here is the practical problem the pause creates. If the order is lifted on appeal in the coming days, the clock is exactly where it was before the ruling, and September 18 is close. An owner who spent the pause assembling documentation lost nothing either way. An owner who read the headline as a cancellation may be starting from zero with days to spare.

Treat September 18 as live unless the Department of Finance or a court formally changes it. We will note any change here.

What should owners do right now?

• Keep everything. The July notice, the envelope, and the security code printed on it are all part of a clean response.
• Know where your property stands: the market value the Department of Finance carries for it, which side of the threshold that value falls on, and which of the five exemption categories fits your situation.
• Have the documentation ready even though determinations are frozen. The order restricts what the city can do; nothing in the reporting suggests owners’ deadlines moved, and the pause can end on an appellate ruling with no warning.
• Watch August 31. The oral argument is the next scheduled event in the case, and an appellate decision could come sooner.

Where does this leave you?

A pause created by a lawsuit over how the rollout was administered is not a reason to un-prepare. It is a reminder that owners who respond precisely, with the right documents and the right exemption category, are in a strong position, whatever the courts decide.

MGNY Consulting is a property tax consultancy, not a law firm, and is not affiliated with the NYC Department of Finance. This article is general information about a pending case based on public reporting, not legal advice. Owners with questions about the litigation itself should consult an attorney.

Share on: