| Defenders of Congestion
Pricing Said Plaintiffs Too Late
Now Injunction Motion Remains
Pending
by
Matthew Russell Lee,
Substack
SDNY
COURTHOUSE,
July 8 – Lawsuits
against New York City's
congestion pricing plan were
heard on May 17 by U.S.
District Court for the
Southern District of New York
Judge Lewis J. Liman. Inner
City Press was there and live
tweeted. Thread.
On July 8, in the
wake of Governor Hochul's 11th
hour announcement, a
proceeding on the still
pending request for a
preliminary injunction in one
of the case was held, Inner
City Press covered it, thread:
Local NYC beat:
now proceeding in Trucking
Assoc of NY v. MTA (congestion
pricing case - moot for now?)
Appearances: This
is Roberta Kaplan, soon to
leave Hecker Fink for my new
firm. Judge: OK... I don't
think I have the authority to
order the defendants to tell
the plaintiffs if and when it
will go into effect - my
equitable jurisdiction has not
been shown.
Judge: This will
await a decision by the MTA
& the relevant authorities
to go forward or not. Should I
just deny the request for a
preliminary injunction at this
time. But if the parties agree
that it is not moot, I'd like
to move it along. There are
legal issues
Plaintiffs'
counsel: We would not like our
motion to be denied. Our
concern is that the MTA has a
meeting in July, and in
August, and they've said they
are ready to go ahead if they
get state and federal
approval. We don't want the PI
denied.
Plaintiffs'
Laura Gulfo of Monaco Cooper
of Albany NY: We'd like it
held in abeyance, held as an
open motion. Judge: What
prejudice would you suffer if
I deny it? And how can I keep
your motion alive if you don't
need the court's assistance,
you have the Governor?
Judge Lewis J. Liman by elizabethwilliamstudio.com
courtesy to Inner City Press
Kaplan:
We are
committed to
giving the
plaintiffs as
much notice as
we get. We
know it would
be 30 days
notice - but
we can't give
90, there
could be an
order. Judge:
What's your
time to
answer?
Kaplan: August
30. But we
could do a
pre-motion
conference
letter
Judge:
When? Let's
say August 2,
four pages,
single spaced.
Will the
plaintiff's
respond?
Plaintiffs'
lawyer: A week
later. August
9. Judge: I'll
keep the
motion on file
for now. But
depending on
how long this
goes, and what
happens in the
next month or
2...
Judge:
I'll call
another
conference,
depending.
Plaintiffs'
lawyer: If the
MTA changes
the proposal,
we reserve the
right to
amend.
Adjourned.
More on
X for
Subscribers here
&
on Substack here
The
case is
Trucking
Association of
New York v.
Metropolitan
Transportation
Authority, et
al.,
24-cv-4111
(Liman)
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 130222, Chinatown Station,
NY NY 10013
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2024 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|
,
