From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Tn. of Whtfld. v. St. Pub. Serv

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 14, 1992
185 A.D.2d 673 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

July 14, 1992

Present — Denman, P.J., Pine, Balio, Lawton and Doerr, JJ.


Petition unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner Town of Wheatfield contends that the Public Service Commission's (PSC) certificate of environmental compatibility and public need for the Empire State Pipeline gas line project must be annulled because it was not given adequate notice of the PSC proceedings. We disagree. The record establishes that Empire State Pipeline duly served petitioner with notice of its application (see, Public Service Law § 122). Although entitled to do so, petitioner did not file the requisite notice to become a party to the proceeding (see, Public Service Law § 124 [i]) and therefore was not entitled to receive ongoing notice of the application process (see, Matter of Ingham v. Public Serv. Commn., 116 A.D.2d 718, 719, appeal dismissed 67 N.Y.2d 1027, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 606). Because petitioner was not a party to the matter before the Public Service Commission, it lacks standing to seek judicial review of the Commission's determination (see, Public Service Law § 128; Matter of Incorporated Vil. of E. Williston v. Public Serv. Commn., 153 A.D.2d 943, 945-946). The petition is therefore dismissed.


Summaries of

Matter of Tn. of Whtfld. v. St. Pub. Serv

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 14, 1992
185 A.D.2d 673 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of Tn. of Whtfld. v. St. Pub. Serv

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of TOWN OF WHEATFIELD, Petitioner, v. STATE OF NEW YORK…

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

Date published: Jul 14, 1992

Citations

185 A.D.2d 673 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
586 N.Y.S.2d 60

Citing Cases

Powerline Coalition, Inc. v. New York State Public Service Commission

Accordingly, such petition was time barred pursuant to Public Service Law § 128 (1). We need not address the…