Transportation Alternatives, Inc. v. Gotbaum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Transportation Alternatives, Inc. v. Gotbaum

199 A.D.2d 53, 605 N.Y.S.2d 26

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

DecidedDecember 7, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 199 A.D.2d 53 (Transportation Alternatives, Inc. v. Gotbaum) 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

Transportation Alternatives, Inc. v. Gotbaum, 199 A.D.2d 53, 605 N.Y.S.2d 26 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Sklar, J.), entered March 31, 1993, which denied petitioners’ CPLR article 78 petition challenging a regulation promulgated by respondent Commissioner of Parks and Recreation which set a speed limit of 15 miles per hour for bicycles traveling on park roads when the parks are closed to motor vehicles, and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We find that petitioners have standing because their interests are germane to their purposes as cycling organizations (Society of Plastics Indus. v County of Suffolk, 77 NY2d 761), but petitioners have not shown that the 15 miles per hour speed limit is unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious (New York State Assn. of Counties v Axelrod, 78 NY2d 158, 166).

Contrary to petitioners’ claim that the respondent’s decision to promulgate the speed limit is not supported by any evidence or expertise, the record contains, inter alia, the police statistics that catalogue the number of bicycle accidents and the admission of one of petitioners’ own witnesses, that higher speed results in more serious accidents. Nor do we find merit in petitioners’ claim that the justification for the speed limit was contrived. While scientific studies of the problem could have been conducted, petitioners have not shown that the respondent’s methodology was irrational (supra). Concur— Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Sklar, J.), entered March 31, 1993, which denied petitioners’ CPLR article 78 petition challenging a regulation promulgated by respondent Commissioner of Parks and Recreation which set a speed limit of 15 miles per hour for bicycles traveling on park roads when the parks are closed to motor vehicles, and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We find that petitioners have standing because their interests are germane to their purposes as cycling organizations (Society of Plastics Indus. v County of Suffolk, 77 NY2d 761), but petitioners have not shown that the 15 miles per hour speed limit is unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious (New York State Assn. of Counties v Axelrod, 78 NY2d 158, 166).

Contrary to petitioners’ claim that the respondent’s decision to promulgate the speed limit is not supported by any evidence or expertise, the record contains, inter alia, the police statistics that catalogue the number of bicycle accidents and the admission of one of petitioners’ own witnesses, that higher speed results in more serious accidents. Nor do we find merit in petitioners’ claim that the justification for the speed limit was contrived. While scientific studies of the problem could have been conducted, petitioners have not shown that the respondent’s methodology was irrational (supra). Concur— Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 A.D.2d 53, 605 N.Y.S.2d 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/transportation-alternatives-inc-v-gotbaum-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack