History
  • No items yet
midpage
Washington Heights Optical, Inc. v. Port Authority
893 N.Y.S.2d 872
N.Y. App. Div.
2010
Check Treatment

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered July 27, 2009, which denied plaintiffs motion for a Yellowstone injunction, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff brought this action to enjoin the Port Authority from terminating its lease (First Natl. Stores v Yellowstone Shopping Ctr., 21 NY2d 630 [1968]). The consent of the states of New York and New Jersey to suits against the Authority (McKinney’s Uncons Laws of NY § 7101 [L 1950, ch 301, § 1]) does not extend to suits seeking to restrain or enjoin the Authority unless brought by the attorney general of either state (Uncons Laws § 7105 [L 1950, ch 301, § 5] ) and the courts lack subject matter jurisdiction over this action (see Matter of New York City Ch., Inc. of Natl. Elec. Contrs. Assn. v Fabber, 73 Misc 2d 859, 864 [1973], affd 41 AD2d 821 [1973]; see also Matter of Lewis v Lefkowitz, 32 Misc 2d 434 [1961]).

While Court of Claims Act § 8 provides an exception to immunity for state agencies acting in a propriety capacity (see Miller v State of New York, 62 NY2d 506, 511 [1984]), there is no analogous provision governing the Authority, a bistate agency resident in both jurisdictions (Uncons Laws § 7106 [L 1950, ch 301, § 6]).

In view of the foregoing, plaintiffs remaining arguments are academic. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Renwick, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Case Details

Case Name: Washington Heights Optical, Inc. v. Port Authority
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Feb 23, 2010
Citation: 893 N.Y.S.2d 872
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.