County of Westchester v. Power Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

County of Westchester v. Power Authority

188 A.D.2d 432, 591 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14746

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 29, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 188 A.D.2d 432 (County of Westchester v. Power Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

County of Westchester v. Power Authority, 188 A.D.2d 432, 591 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14746 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Baer, Jr., J.), entered on or about March 1, 1991, which, inter alia, dismissed with prejudice so much of the petition in this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 as challenges the contracts between intervenor utilities and respondent Power Authority allocating nonpreference hydroelectric power, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

As the IAS Court determined, most of the directives in Public Authorities Law § 1005 (5) are discretionary and present nonjusticiable policy questions (see, Matter of New York State Inspection, Sec. & Law Enforcement Empls. v Cuomo, 64 NY2d 233), and the rest are couched in general terms that were clearly fulfilled by respondent’s allocation which took into account numerous and complex economic factors affecting various consumers as well as the long-standing reliance of upstate consumers on respondent’s hydropower plan. While one may disagree with the wisdom of that plan, it cannot be successfully challenged as arbitrary or capricious.

[433]*433We also note that since the judgment in this case could have adversely affected the intervenor utilities and the Governor, they are indispensable parties who should have been joined (see, CPLR 1001 [a]; 7802 [a]). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Ross and Asch, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Baer, Jr., J.), entered on or about March 1, 1991, which, inter alia, dismissed with prejudice so much of the petition in this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 as challenges the contracts between intervenor utilities and respondent Power Authority allocating nonpreference hydroelectric power, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

As the IAS Court determined, most of the directives in Public Authorities Law § 1005 (5) are discretionary and present nonjusticiable policy questions (see, Matter of New York State Inspection, Sec. & Law Enforcement Empls. v Cuomo, 64 NY2d 233), and the rest are couched in general terms that were clearly fulfilled by respondent’s allocation which took into account numerous and complex economic factors affecting various consumers as well as the long-standing reliance of upstate consumers on respondent’s hydropower plan. While one may disagree with the wisdom of that plan, it cannot be successfully challenged as arbitrary or capricious.

[433]*433We also note that since the judgment in this case could have adversely affected the intervenor utilities and the Governor, they are indispensable parties who should have been joined (see, CPLR 1001 [a]; 7802 [a]). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Ross and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 A.D.2d 432, 591 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14746, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/county-of-westchester-v-power-authority-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack