New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Public Service Law § 99 (2026)

Franchises and privileges

✓ text as retrieved May 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 99. Franchises and privileges. 1.  No telegraph corporation or
telephone corporation hereafter formed shall begin construction of its
telegraph line or telephone line without first having obtained the
permission and approval of the commission and its certificate of public
convenience and necessity and the required consent of the proper
municipal authorities.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, any such
certificate shall be deemed to be granted by the commission ninety days
after such corporation applies to the commission for a certificate,
unless the commission, or its designee, determines within such ninety
day period that the public interest requires the commission's review and
its written order.
  2.  No franchise nor any right to or under any franchise to own or
operate a telegraph line or telephone line shall be assigned,
transferred or leased, nor shall any contract or agreement hereafter
made with reference to or affecting any such franchise or right be valid
or of any force or effect whatsoever, unless the assignment, transfer,
lease, contract or agreement shall have been approved by the commission.
No telephone corporation shall transfer or lease its works or system or
any part of such works or system to any other person or corporation or
contract for the operation of its works or system, without the written
consent of the commission. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any such
transfer or lease between affiliated corporations with an original cost
of (a) less than one hundred thousand dollars proposed by a telephone
corporation having annual gross revenues in excess of two hundred
million dollars, (b) less than twenty-five thousand dollars proposed by
a telephone corporation having annual gross revenues of less than two
hundred million but more than ten million dollars or (c) less than ten
thousand dollars proposed by a telephone corporation having annual gross
revenues of less than ten million dollars and any other transfer or
lease between non-affiliates regardless of cost shall be effective
without the commission's written consent within ninety days after such
corporation notifies the commission that it plans to complete such
transfer or lease and submits a description of the transfer or lease,
unless the commission, or its designee, determines within such ninety
days that the public interest requires the commission's review and
written consent.
  3. The approval of the commission to the exercise of a franchise or to
the assignment, transfer or lease of a franchise shall not be construed
to revive or validate any lapsed or invalid franchise or to enlarge or
add to the powers and privileges contained in the grant of any franchise
or to waive any forfeiture.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1988–1993 · leading case: Cellular Tel. Co. v. Rosenberg, 624 N.E.2d 990 (N.Y. 1993).
Cellular Tel. Co. v. Rosenberg, 624 N.E.2d 990 (N.Y. 1993). “The PSC has issued respondent a certificate of public convenience and necessity, as is required for every telephone corporation (Public Service Law § 99). In addition, the PSC is authorized to prescribe respondent’s service and rate standards (see, Public Service Law § 91).”
New York Tel. Co. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 530 N.E.2d 843 (N.Y. 1988). “Although concluding that the PSC lacked jurisdiction over the DPA under Public Service Law § 110 (3) and not addressing the PSC’s contentions that it had jurisdiction under Public Service Law § 99 (2) and other article 5 sections, the AU nevertheless considered the case on the…”
Cellular Tel. Co. v. Rosenberg, 153 Misc. 2d 302 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1992). “Further, Metro One provides cellular telephone service in New York under a franchise pursuant to Public Service Law §99 and by certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by the Public Service Commission on May 18, 1985.”
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.