City of New York v. New York Jets Football Club, Inc.
New York Supreme Court
394 N.Y.S.2d 799 (1977)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
The City of New York (plaintiff) constructed Shea Stadium (Shea) at great cost, requiring legislative approval for leasing Shea. Shea was constructed to benefit various public interests. The New York Jets (defendant) leased the use of Shea from the city. Under the lease, the Jets were required to play all their home football games after September 1 of each year at Shea. The New York Mets baseball team also leased Shea from the city for home games, and the Mets’ lease had priority over game scheduling during the regular season of baseball and a post-season period when playoff or World Series games might occur. The Jets and the National Football League (NFL) (defendant) were aware of the Mets’ lease; numerous other NFL teams shared their home stadiums with baseball teams. For 13 years, the Jets and the Jets’ predecessor were able to successfully accommodate the Mets’ schedule, scheduling home football games at Shea without conflicts. In 1977, however, the Jets and the NFL scheduled two home games (September 25 and October 2) on dates that could not possibly be played at Shea because of a scheduled Mets’ game or event. The Jets sought to have the games played at a larger facility in New Jersey. New York sued the Jets and the NFL for injunctive relief to stop any games from being scheduled at a location other than Shea. The Jets and the NFL opposed the complaint and request for injunction.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Baer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.