Matter of Patrolmen's Benevolent Association of the City of New York, Inc. v City of New York

Matter of Patrolmen's Benevolent Assn. of City of N.Y., Inc. v City of New York 2006 NY Slip Op 02310 [27 AD3d 381] March 28, 2006 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, May 17, 2006

In the Matter of Patrolmen's Benevolent Association of the City of New York, Inc., et al., Respondents,
v
City of New York et al., Appellants, and New York City Board of Collective Bargaining et al., Respondents.

—[*1]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Edmead, J.), entered on or about March 1, 2005, which, inter alia, remanded to the Board of Collective Bargaining the issue of whether the City can direct petitioners to request certain documents and information through the Municipal Labor Committee, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The administrative refusal, on mootness grounds, to determine petitioners' separate improper practice claim was arbitrary and capricious in light of a viable controversy manifested by, among other things, the City's repeated insistence that petitioners, the exclusive bargaining representatives for its members, proceed through another entity that it often worked with only upon consent. In this regard, the administrative determination was not entitled to deference (see Matter of KSLM-Columbus Apts., Inc. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 5 NY3d 303, 312 [2005]). In view of the foregoing, it is unnecessary to address whether an [*2]exception to the mootness doctrine applied (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]), or whether the administrative body improperly departed from its own precedent. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Sullivan, Williams, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.