From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Long Island Lighting v. Long Island Power

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 25, 1991
177 A.D.2d 686 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

November 25, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Wager, J.).


Ordered that the appeal by the plaintiffs is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from by the intervenor-defendant, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and it is declared that Public Authorities Law § 1020-q (3) is unconstitutional (see, Matter of Long Is. Light. Co. v. Assessor of Town of Brookhaven, 154 A.D.2d 188).

After the plaintiffs perfected their appeals, the plaintiff Long Island Lighting Company (hereinafter LILCO) sold the Shoreham nuclear plant to the defendant Long Island Power Authority (hereinafter the LIPA) for the sum of $1 (see, Matter of Citizens for an Orderly Energy Policy v. Cuomo, 159 A.D.2d 141, affd 78 N.Y.2d 398). Although the sale was intended to put an end to all pending litigation between LILCO and LIPA (see, Long Is. Light. Co. v. Cuomo, 888 F.2d 230, 232), nevertheless, the individual plaintiff, Herbert Jaffe, a LILCO shareholder, continues to challenge, on constitutional grounds, various provisions of the Long Island Power Authority Act.

The first of these provisions, Public Authorities Law § 1020-q (3), was previously held to be unconstitutional by this court in a related tax certiorari case (see, Matter of Long Is. Light. Co. v. Assessor of Town of Brookhaven, supra). Accordingly, so much of the judgment of the Supreme Court as sustained the constitutionality of Public Authorities Law § 1020-q (3) must be reversed.

The remainder of the challenged provisions generally pertain to the LIPA's power to acquire the stock of LILCO through a corporate takeover. Under the realities of this case, including the entire history of the Shoreham plant, such an eventuality may not come to pass. Accordingly, the remainder of the appeals are dismissed as academic (see, Cuomo v. Long Is. Light. Co., 71 N.Y.2d 349; see also, Town of Islip v. Cuomo, 147 A.D.2d 56, 66; New York Pub. Interest Research Group v. Regan, 91 A.D.2d 774, 775; Long Is. Light. Co. v. Cuomo, supra). Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Balletta and O'Brien, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Long Island Lighting v. Long Island Power

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 25, 1991
177 A.D.2d 686 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Long Island Lighting v. Long Island Power

Case Details

Full title:LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY et al., Appellants, v. LONG ISLAND POWER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 25, 1991

Citations

177 A.D.2d 686 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)