Best Payphones, Inc. v. Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications
New York Court of Appeals
5 N.Y.3d 30, 799 N.Y.S.2d 182, 832 N.E.2d 38 (2005)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
Best Payphones, Inc. (Best) (plaintiff) owned and operated sidewalk pay telephones. In August 1999, New York City (city) approved a franchise for Best to provide pay phones on public streets. This approval was based on several conditions, including Best’s execution and delivery of a signed franchise agreement. In January 2000, the city’s Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (department) (defendant) notified Best that because Best had not submitted, among other things, an executed franchise agreement, the city decided not to approve Best’s franchise. The department also notified Best that Best had 60 days to (1) agree to sell its phones to a franchised entity, (2) remove its phones from the city’s streets, or (3) submit executed copies of the franchise agreement and other missing documents. In addition, the department warned Best that it would remove Best’s phones from the city’s streets if Best failed to take any of these actions. Over the next 60 days, Best failed to exercise any of the department’s options, leading the department to begin removing Best’s phones from the city’s streets. Thereafter, in May 2000, Best delivered executed copies of the franchise agreement to the city. However, in June 2000, the city advised Best that Best was unlawfully maintaining phones on city property. In July 2000, Best filed a petition pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) Article 78 against the department. The department moved to dismiss Best’s petition on the grounds that all but one of Best’s claims were time-barred and that Best had failed to properly serve the department. The supreme court dismissed the petition due to the lack of proper service but also opined that Best’s claims were untimely. The appellate division affirmed on the basis of the statute of limitations, concluding that the four-month statute of limitations commenced in January 2000 because that was when the department’s determination with respect to Best became final and binding. Best appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kaye, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
