New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Public Service Law § 22 (2026)

Rehearing before commission

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 22. Rehearing before commission.  After an order has been made by
the commission any corporation or person interested therein shall have
the right to apply for a rehearing in respect to any matter determined
therein, but any such application must be made within thirty days after
the service of such order, unless the commission for good cause shown
shall otherwise direct; and the commission shall grant and hold such a
rehearing if in its judgment sufficient reason therefore be made to
appear. The decision of the commission granting or refusing the
application for a rehearing shall be made within thirty days after the
making of such application. If a rehearing shall be granted, the same
shall be determined by the commission within thirty days after the same
shall be finally submitted.  An application for such a rehearing shall
not excuse any corporation or person from complying with or obeying any
order or any requirement of any order of the commission, or operate in
any manner to stay or postpone the enforcement thereof except as the
commission may by order direct. If, after such rehearing and a
consideration of the facts, including those arising since the making of
the order, the commission shall be of opinion that the original order or
any part thereof is in any respect unjust or unwarranted, or should be
changed, the commission may abrogate or change the same. An order made
after any such rehearing abrogating or changing the original order shall
have the same force and effect as an original order but shall not affect
any right or the enforcement of any right arising from or by virtue of
the original order.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 231 A.D.2d 284 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 231 A.D.2d 284 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997). · cites it 2× “5 million members State-wide, petitioned for a rehearing of the Track 1 determination within 30 days thereafter (see, Public Service Law § 22). On March 14, 1994 MCI did, however, join in a March 11, 1994 petition for rehearing filed by Sprint Communications Company.”

Jamaica Water Supply Co.v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 152 A.D.2d 17 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989). “And even then, the adjustments would be reviewable under respondent’s mandatory rehearing procedure (Public Service Law § 22). The second step in the ripeness analysis considers the effect on petitioner and respondent if judicial review is denied.”

Gross v. State of New York Pub. Serv. Commmission, 195 A.D.2d 866 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993). “We note that this application itself was untimely because the statute provides that an application "for a rehearing in respect to any matter determined * * * must be made within thirty days after the service of such order, unless the [PSC] for good cause shown shall otherwise…”

Columbia Gas of New York, Inc. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 118 A.D.2d 305 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986). “Petitioner’s first contention, that the Commission erred in refusing to grant a rehearing because, after issuance of the Commission’s order, Dresser renegotiated its contract with its current gas supplier, thus lowering the cost of gas being delivered to Dresser to a level at or…”

Matter of Clean Air Coalition of W. N.Y., Inc. v. New York State Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 2024 NY Slip Op 01233 (N.Y. App. Div. 2024). · cites it 3× “In October 2022, petitioners requested a rehearing pursuant to Public Service Law § 22 and 16 NYCRR 3.7.”

Matter of Citizens for the Preserv. of Wainscott, Inc. v. New York State Pub. Serv. Commn., 2023 NY Slip Op 02510 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023). “Subsequently, CPW petitioned the Commission for a rehearing of SFW's CECPN application, pursuant to Public Service Law §§ 22 and 128(1) and 16 NYCRR 3.”

Entergy Nuclear Power Mktg., LLC v. New York State Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 122 A.D.3d 1024 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · cites it 7× “Finding that petitioners failed to timely file their petition and otherwise failed to establish good cause for their delay (see Public Service Law §§ 22, 128 [1]; 16 NYCRR 3.”

MatterofEntergyNuclearPowerMarketing,LLCvNewYorkStatePublicServiceCommission (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · cites it 5× “Finding that petitioners failed to timely file their petition and otherwise failed to establish good cause for their delay (see Public Service Law §§ 22, 128 [1]; 16 NYCRR 3.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.