Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. City of New York

New York Court of Appeals

Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. City of New York

353 N.E.2d 848, 39 N.Y.2d 953, 386 N.Y.S.2d 884, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2903

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 1, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 353 N.E.2d 848 (Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. City of New York, 353 N.E.2d 848, 39 N.Y.2d 953, 386 N.Y.S.2d 884, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2903 (N.Y. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum. Order affirmed, without costs, on the memorandum at the Appellate Division, with these additional comments. The formula set forth in section 1277 of the Public Authorities Law dealing with "total” costs was never intended by the Legislature to call for a precise allocation of the costs of operation and maintenance of local stations as might be expected from the perspective of cost analysis. Rather it was a responsible political determination as to the fair apportionment of the economic burden of the costs of mass transportation. Hence, the arguments of normal cost accounting may be said to be largely irrelevant (Metropolitan Transp. Auth. v City of New York, 26 NY2d 817). It is true that the contributions of the Connecticut Transportation Authority and Penn Central were not contemplated when the formula was originally fixed. If there is now to be an adjustment or revision of the formula it should be at the hands of the Legislature.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

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

Memorandum. Order affirmed, without costs, on the memorandum at the Appellate Division, with these additional comments. The formula set forth in section 1277 of the Public Authorities Law dealing with "total” costs was never intended by the Legislature to call for a precise allocation of the costs of operation and maintenance of local stations as might be expected from the perspective of cost analysis. Rather it was a responsible political determination as to the fair apportionment of the economic burden of the costs of mass transportation. Hence, the arguments of normal cost accounting may be said to be largely irrelevant (Metropolitan Transp. Auth. v City of New York, 26 NY2d 817). It is true that the contributions of the Connecticut Transportation Authority and Penn Central were not contemplated when the formula was originally fixed. If there is now to be an adjustment or revision of the formula it should be at the hands of the Legislature.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

353 N.E.2d 848, 39 N.Y.2d 953, 386 N.Y.S.2d 884, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/metropolitan-transportation-authority-v-city-of-new-york-ny-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack