School of Language & Communication Development v. Long Island Power Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

School of Language & Communication Development v. Long Island Power Authority

283 A.D.2d 506, 724 N.Y.S.2d 872, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4996

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 14, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Long Island Power Authority, dated July 19, 1999, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), entered February 28, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the respondent’s determination was neither arbitrary nor capricious (see, CPLR 7803 [3]; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). The respondent’s interpretation of the applicable tariff is not contrary to its plain language or otherwise irrational or unreasonable (see, Matter of Bronxwood Home for the Aged v Public Serv. Commn., 218 AD2d 882; Matter of Consolidated Communication Consultant Servs. v New York State Pub. Serv. Commn., 195 AD2d 849, 851; Matter of Incorporated Vil. of Val. Stream v State of N. Y. Pub. Serv. Commn., 107 AD2d 856, 857). Santucci, J. P., Altman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Long Island Power Authority, dated July 19, 1999, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), entered February 28, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the respondent’s determination was neither arbitrary nor capricious (see, CPLR 7803 [3]; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). The respondent’s interpretation of the applicable tariff is not contrary to its plain language or otherwise irrational or unreasonable (see, Matter of Bronxwood Home for the Aged v Public Serv. Commn., 218 AD2d 882; Matter of Consolidated Communication Consultant Servs. v New York State Pub. Serv. Commn., 195 AD2d 849, 851; Matter of Incorporated Vil. of Val. Stream v State of N. Y. Pub. Serv. Commn., 107 AD2d 856, 857). Santucci, J. P., Altman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.

School of Language & Communication Development v. Long Island Power Authority, 283 A.D.2d 506, 724 N.Y.S.2d 872, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4996 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

283 A.D.2d 506 (School of Language & Communication Development v. Long Island Power Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related