Judge Backs Order Blocking Congestion Tax on Rides in Manhattan
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Lynn Kotler said a temporary restraining order to levy congestion taxes on taxis and other ride services that make trips into Manhattan below 96th Street would remain in place until at least Jan. 31.
January 17, 2019 at 04:46 PM
4 minute read
A state court judge on Thursday left in place an order blocking implementation of new taxes for taxi cabs, for-hire vehicles and ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft that make trips into a designated congestion area in Manhattan.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Lynn Kotler said a temporary restraining order to levy congestion taxes on taxis and other ride services that make trips into Manhattan below 96th Street, which was supposed to take effect at the beginning of the year, would remain in place until at least Jan. 31.
Kotler's determination came after hearing oral arguments from the state Attorney General's Office in defense of the tax and attorneys for drivers, with each side presenting Kotler with dire consequences in the event that the new tax is levied or if it continues to be blocked.
The new tax, passed last year by the State Assembly, imposes a $2.75 charge on ride-hailing services and for-hire services such as black cars and limos for trips in and out of the congestion zone and a $2.50 charge on taxi cabs.
All vehicles would be charged $1 for trips above 96th Street; additionally, there is already a 50 cent surcharge on cab rides that is passed along to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
The law requires that the charges be passed along to passengers.
Assistant Attorney General Noam Lerer argued that the Legislature intended for the tax to ease rising automobile congestion in Manhattan while providing badly needed revenue for the MTA.
Lerer said that the MTA drew up its budget with the congestion tax revenue in mind and that it is losing $1 million each day that Kotler's injunction remains in place. If it keeps up, he argued, the MTA may have to make cuts in other areas to make up for the missing revenue.
“Something is going to have to give,” Lerer said.
But Brett Berman, a partner at Fox Rothschild who is representing a group of cabbies and taxicab medallion owners, argued that the new tax is being levied on cabbies at a time when app-based ride-hailing services have taken a big bite out of their business and the value of taxicab medallions have plummeted.
Berman also noted that app-based ride-hailing services will only be hit with a 75-cent charge for rides when their drivers are offering shared-ride services such as Uber Pool, regardless of whether the drivers are actually carrying more than one passenger.
“It is unprecedented what has happened in this industry,” Berman said. The attorney also noted that in 2018, eight drivers licensed by the city's Taxi and Limousine Commission committed suicide, which advocates have chalked up to financial hardship.
The plaintiffs also argue that the TLC would need to promulgate new rules to pass the costs of the new taxes along to passengers, but the TLC, a defendant in the case, says that new regulations aren't needed.
While the TLC finds itself at odds with cab drivers and medallion in the courtroom, Meera Joshi, chairman and CEO of the commission, said that, after the congestion tax is implemented, it would cost $5.80 just to step into a cab and that is going to be “devastating” for the industry.
Uber and Lyft, which have expressed support for congestion pricing schemes in New York City but were recently subjected to a one-year freeze on the number of cars that the companies can have on the city's streets, are not parties to the suit.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDecision of the Day: Postal Service Shows Media Outlets' Requested Change of Address Data Is Protected
Decision of the Day: Canada-Based Defendant Had Virtual Office in New York, Giving Court Jurisdiction
NY Court Imposes Strict Construction on Additional Insureds in Construction
8 minute readSidley Austin Scores Landmark Civil Rights Verdict Against Prolonged Solitary Confinement in State Prisons
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft and Pryor Cashman have entered appearances for Diageo Americas Supply d/b/a Ciroc Distilling Co. and Sony Songs, a division of Sony Music Publishing, respectively, in a pending lawsuit. The case was filed Sept. 10 in New York Southern District Court by the Bloom Firm and IP Legal Studio on behalf of Dawn Angelique Richard. The plaintiff, who performed as a member of producer Sean 'Diddy' Combs girl group Danity Kane and later his band, Diddy - Dirty Money, claims that she was financially exploited by Combs and subjected to inhumane working conditions. Among other violations, Richard claims that Combs required group members to remain at his residences and studios, deprived them of adequate food and sleep and forced them to rehearse for 36 to 48 hours without breaks. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla, is 1:24-cv-06848, Richard v. Combs et al.
Who Got The Work
Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Kevin M. McGinty of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, as well as Jesse W. Belcher-Timme of Doherty, Wallace, Pillsbury & Murphy, have stepped in to defend Peter Pan Bus Lines in a pending consumer class action. The suit, filed Sept. 4 in Massachusetts District Court by Hackett Feinberg PC and KalielGold PLLC, accuses the defendant of charging undisclosed 'junk fees' on top of ticket prices during checkout. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Mark G. Mastroianni, is 3:24-cv-12277, Mulani et al v. Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250