Legal Opinion · Dissent
Matter of Prometheus Realty Corp. v. New York City Water Bd.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 16, 2017No. 1805 653003/16Published
1DissentKahn, J.
Because I believe that the actions of the New York City Water Board in approving the 2.1% rate increase and one-time credit to class 1 property owners were neither ultra vires nor demonstrably arbitrary and capricious, I respectfully dissent.
At the outset, it is important to note that the rate increase and credit were approved as components of an overall rate proposal to be implemented in FY 2017 (FY 2017 Rate Proposal). Under that proposal, not only would class 1 property owners receive an immediate credit of $183 in FY 2017, but each ratepayer, including class 2, 3 and 4 property owners,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Watergate II Apartments v. Buffalo Sewer AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Peckham v. CalogeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2009
- Keeney v. Comptroller of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- In Re the Transfer Tax Upon the Estate of KeeneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- New York Telephone Co. v. City of AmsterdamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.