Black Car Assistance Corp. v. City of N.Y.
| Decision Date | 29 October 2013 |
| Citation | 110 A.D.3d 618,2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 06988,973 N.Y.S.2d 627 |
| Parties | In re BLACK CAR ASSISTANCE CORPORATION, et al., Petitioners–Appellants, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents–Respondents, Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade, et al., Intervenor–Respondents–Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York (Randy M. Mastro of counsel), for appellants.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Ronald E. Sternberg of counsel), for respondents.
Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP, New York (Richard D. Emery of counsel), for intervenor-respondents.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.), entered April 26, 2013, which denied the petition to enjoin the implementation of respondent Taxi and Limousine Commission's (TLC) twelve-month pilot program to allow medallion cabs to arrange passenger pickups via smart phone applications (E–Hail Program), vacated the temporary restraining order, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Petitioners, entities that represent or have financial interests in businesses that operate black or livery cars, filed the instant petition for an order declaring the E-hail Program null and void, arguing that respondent TLC exceeded its authority in adopting this program, that provisions of the program improperly depart from applicable provisions of the New York City Administrative Code, and that the program was adopted without complying with procedures required to change rules pursuant to the New York City Administrative Procedure Act (CAPA) and in violation of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). Contrary to petitioners' arguments, the E–Hail Program complies with the plain language of New York City Charter Section 2303(b)(9), as it was adopted for the “limited purpose” of studying the feasibility of using smart phone application to hail medallion taxis and for the “limited time” of 12 months.
Additionally, the program complies with Administrative Code § 19–511(a) requiring the licensing of communications systems upon such terms as TLC deems advisable by giving TLC the authority to issue temporary authorizations for the communications systems needed to accept passenger hails electronically, as those authorizations function as temporary, limited licenses appropriate for a pilot program.
F...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Greater N.Y. Taxi Ass'n v.
...City of New York, 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 30824[U], 2013 WL 1808082 [Sup.Ct., N.Y. County 2013] [e-hail pilot program], affd.110 A.D.3d 618, 973 N.Y.S.2d 627 [1st Dept.2013] ). However, the mere absence of case law addressing a similar program does not constitute grounds for rejecting the progra......
-
Livery Round Table, Inc. v.
...636-40 (N.Y. 2015); Pavle-Marty Cab Corp. v. City of New York, 399 N.E.2d 945, 946 (N.Y. 1979); Black Car Assistance Corp. v. City of New York, 973 N.Y.S.2d 627, 628-29 (1st Dep't 2013). It would be extraordinary for this Court to hold at the end of this case that every act of the Commissio......
-
Thomas v. Nyll Mgmt. Ltd.
...quantified terms, and finding increasing positive test results for impingement, in the months preceding his shoulder surgery, which was [973 N.Y.S.2d 627]sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether he sustained “significant” limitations in use of his shoulder following the acc......
-
Greater N.Y. Taxi Ass'n v.
...project for limited periods of time ( seeN.Y. City Charter § 2303 [b] [9]; see also Matter of Black Car Assistance Corp. v. City of New York, 110 A.D.3d 618, 618–619, 973 N.Y.S.2d 627 [1st Dept.2013] [holding that the 12–month pilot E–Hail Program complies with N.Y. City Charter § 2303(b)(9......