Cluster 2590048

While it is true that OCFS has broad authority, such authority is limited to "fill[ing] in details and interstices and . . . mak[ing] subsidiary policy choices consistent with the enabling legislation " ( Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo , 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991] [emphasis added]; accord Matter of Statewide Coalition of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v New York City Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene , 23 NY3d at 700 ).

Rather, the Legislature made the basic policy choice and authorized the Committee “‘to fill in details and interstices and to make [narrow, limited] subsidiary policy choices consistent with the enabling legislation’” (Dorst v Pataki, 90 NY2d 696, 699 [1997], quoting Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991]) on an issue that we have previously recognized may be assigned.

See Boreali v. Axelrod, 71 N.Y.2d 1 (1987); Citizens for an Orderly Energy Policy v. Cuomo, 78 N.Y.2d 398, 410 (1991).

Those purposes were primarily to close the Shoreham nuclear power plant, to replace LILCO as the provider of electric and gas power on Long Island, and to reduce power costs for [*2] Long Island ratepayers ( Matter of Citizens for an Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo , 78 NY2d 398, 407).

Those purposes were primarily to close the Shoreham nuclear power plant, to replace LILCO as the provider of electric and gas power on Long Island, and to reduce power costs for Long Island ratepayers ( Matter of Citizens for an Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo , 78 NY2d 398, 407).

Again, “ ‘[t]he Legislature is not required in its enactments to supply agencies with rigid marching orders’ ” (Matter of NYC C.L.A.S.H., Inc. v New York State Off. of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preserv., 125 AD3d 105 , *22 110 [2014], affd 27 NY3d 174 [2016], quoting Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991]).

While there may be no specific statutory delegation of authority directing respondents to establish caps on reimbursement for administrative costs and executive compensation, “[t]he Legislature is not required in its enactments to supply agencies with rigid marching orders” (Matter of NYC C.L.A.S.H., Inc., 125 AD3d at 110, quoting Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991]; accord Matter of New York Statewide Coalition of Hispanic Chambe…

While there may not exist a specific statutory delegation of authority directing respondents to establish no smoking areas, “[t]he Legislature is not required in its enactments to supply agencies with rigid marching orders” (Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991]; accord Matter of New York Statewide Coalition of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v New York City Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene, 23 NY3d at 700 ).

While there may not exist a specific statutory delegation of authority directing respondents to establish no smoking areas, “[t]he Legislature is not required in its enactments to supply agencies with rigid marching orders” (Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991]; accord Matter of New York Statewide Coalition of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v New York City Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene, 23 NY3d at 700 ).

Although “[t]he Legislature is not required in its enactments to supply agencies with rigid marching orders” and the legislative branch may, while declaring “its policy in general terms by statute, endow administrative agencies with the power and flexibility to fill in details and interstices and to make subsidiary policy choices consistent with the enabling legislation” (Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991]), the policy choices ma…

Having made the basic policy choice that some hospitals and nursing homes needed to be closed and others needed to be resized, consolidated, converted, or restructured, the legislation permissibly authorized the Commission “ ‘to fill in details and interstices and to make subsidiary policy choices consistent with the enabling legislation’ ” (Dorst v Pataki, 90 NY2d 696, 699 [1997], quoting Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991]; see …

(Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 411 [1991]; Nicholas at 31.) Thus, it is not necessary that the Legislature supply administrative officials with rigid formulas in areas where there are infinitely variable conditions thereby necessitating flexibility.

Further, the Court of Appeals discussed in another case the issue of delegation of policy-making powers by the Legislature: "A check-and-balance in the distribution of powers is that the legislative branch may not delegate away its fundamental lawmaking powers or policymaking choices." ( Matter of Citizens for Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo , 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991].) In light of the court's interpretation of the certification provision of Executive Law § 12, which rejects th…

Further, the Court of Appeals discussed in another case the issue of delegation of policy-making powers by the Legislature: “A check-and-balance in the distribution of powers is that the legislative branch may not delegate away its fundamental lawmaking powers or policymaking choices.” (Matter of Citizens for Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 [1991].) In light of the court’s interpretation of the certification provision of Executive Law § 12, which rejects the …

The LIPA Act created LIPA, a not-for-profit public corporation with broad powers to effectuate the legislation’s purposes, which were primarily to close the Shoreham plant, to replace LILCO as the provider of power on Long Island, and to reduce power costs for Long Island ratepayers (see Public Authorities Law §§ 1020-a, 1020-c, 1020-f, 1020-g, 1020-h; Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, supra at 407).

(Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 414 [1991].) The legislation’s primary statutory objectives were: (1) closing the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant; (2) replacing LILCO as the provider of gas and electric power on Long Island; and (3) reducing power costs (Public Authorities Law §§ 1020-f, 1020-g, 1020-h).

The court is not required to interpret a statute to reach an absurd result or in contravention of the clear legislative intent (Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 412, 425).

Such intent may be discerned where the Legislature has granted the agency sufficiently broadly worded powers so as "to fill in the interstices in the legislative product.” (Matter of Nicholas v Kahn, supra, at 31; see also, Boreali v Axelrod, 71 NY2d 1, 13 [1987]; Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410-411 [1991].) In other words, "[I]n discharging [its] responsibilities, an agency is 'clothed with those powers expressly conferred by its au…

Especially in complex fields, "[t]he Legislature is not required in its enactments to supply agencies with rigid marching orders” (Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410).

Further, the conveyance is an action “of the Legislature and the Governor of the State of New York” (617.5 [c] [37]; see Matter of Citizens for an Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398 , 415 [1991], rearg denied 79 NY2d 851 [1992]; Matter of Cerro v Town of Kingsbury, 250 AD2d 978, 979 [1998], appeal dismissed 92 NY2d 875 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 812 [1998]; see generally Matter of West Vil.

Because PLAs do not generically constitute policymaking, because some freedom and flexibility have been delegated to public benefit corporations, and because the particular interests embodied in New York's competitive bidding statutes have long been clearly articulated as standards for agency action, the separation of powers doctrine is not implicated here (dissenting opn, at 91; see , Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo , 78 N.Y.2d 398, 410 ). [*] In sum…

Because PLAs do not genetically constitute policymaking, because some freedom and flexibility have been delegated to public benefit corporations, and because the particular interests embodied in New York’s competitive bidding statutes have long been clearly articulated as standards for agency action, the separation of powers doctrine is not implicated here (dissenting opn, at 91; see, Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 ). * In sum, the …

As we have previously observed, in response to this accident the United States Congress determined that no nuclear plant should be licensed to operate unless an adequate emergency plan could be devised and implemented for the area surrounding the nuclear facility (see, Matter of Prospect v Cohalan, 109 AD2d 210, 211 , affd 65 NY2d 867 ; see, Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 159 AD2d 141, 148 , affd 78 NY2d 398 , supra; see also, 45 Fed Reg 55,402 [198…

See generally In re Citizens for an Orderly Energy Policy, Inc., v. Cuomo, 78 N.Y.2d 398, 406-09 , 582 N.E.2d 568, 570-71 , 576 N.Y.S.2d 185, 187-88 (1991).

See generally In re Citizens for an Orderly Energy Policy, Inc., v. Cuomo, 78 N.Y.2d 398, 406-09 , 582 N.E.2d 568, 570-71 , 576 N.Y.S.2d 185, 187-88 (1991). 17 The crankshaft failures and related costs came under scrutiny by the Public Service Commission of New York State (the "PSC") as part of an investigation that it conducted regarding the increased costs and delays in the construction of Shoreham.

Corp., 61 NY2d 738, 739 ; see, Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 416-417 ; Matter of McKelvey v White, supra, at 835; Matter of City of Ithaca v Tompkins County Bd. of Representatives, 164 AD2d 726, 728-729 ).

Auth., 91 NY2d at 11 ; compare Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 412 [1991] [authorizing legislation conferred broad authority, flexibility and discretion upon power authority to implement statutory purpose]; Matter of Hanover Sand & Gravel v New York State Thruway Auth., 65 AD2d 860, 861 [1978] [authority vested with “otherwise unrestricted discretion ‘to make contracts . . . and to execute all instruments necessary or convenient’ to carr…

Eaton v New York City Conciliation & Appeals Bd., 56 NY2d 340 [1982] [statute exempted only certain types of institutions; nothing in statute permitted interpretation, or suggested, that legislature intended that similar exemption applied to other types of institutions]; Matter of Schwartz Landes Assoc. v New York City Conciliation & Appeals Bd., 117 AD2d 74 [1st Dept 1986] [that act contained single exemption to general rule precluded existence of other exemptions]; see als…

It is axiomatic that “the legislative branch may not constitutionally cede its fundamental policymaking responsibility to a regulatory agency” (Matter of Medical Socy. of State of N.Y. v Serio, 100 NY2d 854, 864 ; see Boreali v Axelrod, 71 NY2d 1, 9-10 ; see also Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 , rearg denied 79 NY2d 851 , 852).

It is axiomatic that “the legislative branch may not constitutionally cede its fundamental policymaking responsibility to a regulatory agency” (Matter of Medical Socy. of State of N.Y. v Serio, 100 NY2d 854, 864 [2003]; see Boreali v Axelrod, 71 NY2d 1, 9-10 [1987]; see also Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398 , 410 [1991], rearg denied 79 NY2d 851 [1992]).

In determining whether executive action crosses the line and constitutes an inappropriate assumption of legislative power, the Court of Appeals has looked to whether the executive action "create[s] a different policy, not embraced in the legislation” or whether the executive action is in fact inconsistent with existing State law (Matter of Broidrick v Lindsay, 39 NY2d 641, 646-648 ; see also, Matter of Citizens For Orderly Energy Policy v Cuomo, 78 NY2d 398, 410 ["only execu…

(See, Matter of City of Yonkers v County of Westchester, 183 AD2d 823 [2d Dept 1992] [County’s stipulation with DEC to conduct "Sewer System Evaluation Survey” not subject to SEQRA review]; Matter of Schiff v Board of Estimate, 122 AD2d 57 [2d Dept 1986] [Board of Estimate resolution recommending that Department of Sanitation study feasibility of constructing several resource recovery facilities not subject to SEQRA review]; see also, Matter of Citizens For An Orderly Energy…