From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of 86th St. Tenants v. N.Y. St. Comm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 15, 1995
216 A.D.2d 96 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

June 15, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Karla Moskowitz, J., Carmen Ciparick, J.


We agree with the IAS Court's rulings with respect to the various points raised on appeal. Petitioners do not have a constitutional right to a full evidentiary hearing prior to the installation of cable upgrade equipment in their apartment buildings pursuant to Executive Law § 828, the hearing procedures under 9 N.Y.CRR part 598 affording them an adequate opportunity to be heard prior to issuance of the Orders of Entry ( see, Fifth Ave. Coach Lines v. City of New York, 11 N.Y.2d 342, 348). The four petitioners who refused to participate in the proceedings before the Commission lacked standing to maintain this article 78 proceeding ( see, New York Inst. for Educ. of Blind v. United Fedn. of Teachers' Comm. for N.Y. Inst. for Educ. of Blind, 83 A.D.2d 390, 403, affd 57 N.Y.2d 982). The Commission had jurisdiction to declare the cable companies in compliance with Executive Law § 828 and their entitlement to install the cable facilities ( see, Matter of City of New York v. State of N Y Commn. on Cable Tel., 47 N.Y.2d 89, 92-93; see generally, Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 53 N.Y.2d 124, revd on other grounds 458 U.S. 419, on remand 58 N.Y.2d 143). Petitioners' construction of the "not mandatory" portion of the regulation (9 NYCRR 598.4 [b] [9]) to mean that a landlord choosing not to participate would not be bound by the Commissioner's determination is, as the IAS Court said, "absurd, [since it] would allow any landlord to subvert the authority of the Commission simply by defaulting". Also to be upheld as reasonable is the Commission's interpretation of Executive Law § 828 as authorizing building-wide rather than piecemeal installation ( see, Cable Tel. Assn. v. New York State Commn. on Cable Tel., 155 Misc.2d 322, 327-328).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of 86th St. Tenants v. N.Y. St. Comm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 15, 1995
216 A.D.2d 96 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Matter of 86th St. Tenants v. N.Y. St. Comm

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of 86TH STREET TENANTS CORP. et al., Appellants, v. NEW YORK…

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

Date published: Jun 15, 1995

Citations

216 A.D.2d 96 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
627 N.Y.S.2d 693