Legal Opinion
Stavisky v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided March 8, 1982No. CV 82-0228PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PLATT, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, Assemblyman Leonard Stavisky and Joseph Fierstein, by order to show cause seek a preliminary injunction 1 enjoining the defendants, Metropolitan Transportation Authority and New York City Transit Authority (referred to as the “MTA” and “NYCTA” or collectively as the “local defendants”), from continuing repair operations that necessitate the suspension of service on the IRT # 7 Flushing Line (Flushing line) until defendants conduct public hearings allegedly required by section 5(i) of the Urban Mass Transportation Act (UMT Act), 49' U.S.C.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. CampSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Cannon v. University of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP)Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
- California v. Sierra ClubSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rapid Transit Advocates, Inc. v. Southern California Rapid Transit DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Rapid Transit Advocates, Inc., a California Non-Profit Corporation and Wilshire Homeowners Alliance, an Unincorporated Association, Plaintiffs v. Southern California Rapid Transit District Urban Mass Transportation Administration of the United States Department of Transportation Theodore Lutz, as Administrator of the Urban Mass Transportation Administration of the United States Department of Transportation and Neil Goldschmidt, as Secretary of the United States Department of Transportation, Rapid Transit Advocates, Inc., a California Non-Profit Corporation and Wilshire Homeowners Alliance, an Unincorporated Association, Plaintiffs v. Southern California Rapid Transit District Urban Mass Transportation AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985