Staten Island Edison Corp. v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Staten Island Edison Corp. v. New York City Housing Authority

269 A.D. 996, 58 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965

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

DecidedNovember 19, 1945

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D. 996 (Staten Island Edison Corp. v. New York City Housing 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

Staten Island Edison Corp. v. New York City Housing Authority, 269 A.D. 996, 58 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Action for a declaratory judgment that the [997]*997defendants are not entitled to the “ public building ” rate for electric energy furnished to a housing project in Staten Island and for a money judgment for the difference between the “ public building ” rate and the “ general service ” rate. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for judgment under rule 112 of the Buies of Civil Practice, and directing the entry of a judgment dismissing the complaint on the merits, and the judgment entered pursuant thereto, unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The test is whether the purpose of the use is in furtherance of a public benefit. Here that purpose is to safeguard the “ entire public from the menace of the slums.” (Matter of N. Y. City H. Authority v. Muller, 270 N. Y. 333, 342.) The effectuation of this purpose being a public benefit under the pertinent statutes and cases, the buildings, owned and operated by the defendants and devoted to its accomplishment, are public buildings. Present — Close, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ. [184 Misc. 564.] [See post, p. 1050.]

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

Action for a declaratory judgment that the [997]*997defendants are not entitled to the “ public building ” rate for electric energy furnished to a housing project in Staten Island and for a money judgment for the difference between the “ public building ” rate and the “ general service ” rate. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for judgment under rule 112 of the Buies of Civil Practice, and directing the entry of a judgment dismissing the complaint on the merits, and the judgment entered pursuant thereto, unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The test is whether the purpose of the use is in furtherance of a public benefit. Here that purpose is to safeguard the “ entire public from the menace of the slums.” (Matter of N. Y. City H. Authority v. Muller, 270 N. Y. 333, 342.) The effectuation of this purpose being a public benefit under the pertinent statutes and cases, the buildings, owned and operated by the defendants and devoted to its accomplishment, are public buildings. Present — Close, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ. [184 Misc. 564.] [See post, p. 1050.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D. 996, 58 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4965, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/staten-island-edison-corp-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack