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

New York Court of Appeals·Decided July 1, 1976·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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.

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

353 N.E.2d 848 (Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related