Majority
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Transit Authority dated April 10, 2013, which deemed the petitioner to be a “non-responsible” bidder for the subject contract and ineligible to be awarded the subject contract, the petitioner appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (F. Rivera, J.), dated June 4, 2013, as denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Our review of the subject determination of the respondent, the New York City Transit Authority (hereinafter the NYCTA), which concluded that the petitioner was a nonresponsible bidder for the subject contract (see Public Authorities Law § 1209 [1]), is limited to “whether a determination was made in violation of lawful procedure, was affected by an error of law or was arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion” (CPLR 7803 [3]; see Matter of DeFoe Corp. v New York City Dept. of Transp., 87 NY2d 754 , 760 [1996]; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222 , 230-231 [1974]). We may disturb the subject determination only if no rational basis exists for its conclusion (see Matter of Conduit & Found. Corp. v Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 66 NY2d 144 , 149 [1985]; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d at 230-231 ).
Here, there was a rational basis for the NYCTA’s determination that the petitioner was a nonresponsible bidder for the
The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit.
Accordingly, we affirm the Supreme Court’s denial of the petition and dismissal of the proceeding (see Matter of Daxor Corp. v State of N.Y. Dept. of Health, 90 NY2d 89 , 101 [1997]; Matter of Toussie v County of Suffolk, 26 AD3d 506 , 507 [2006]; Matter of Quadrozzi Concrete Corp. v Miele, 5 AD3d 686 , 687 [2004]; Matter of Tally Constr. Co. v Hevesi, 214 AD2d 465 [1995]; Matter of A. Grgas Contr. Co. v Mercklowitz, 168 AD2d 678 , 679 [1990]).
Rivera, J.R, Chambers, Miller and Duffy, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- DeFoe Corp. v. New York City Department of Transportation 87 NY2d 754 at 760 p. 867
- Pell v. Board of Education 34 NY2d 222 at 230-231 p. 867
- Conduit & Foundation Corp. v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority 66 NY2d 144 at 149 p. 867
- Daxor Corp. v. State of New York Department of Health 90 NY2d 89 at 101 p. 868
- Toussie v. County of Suffolk 26 AD3d 506 at 507 p. 868
- Tully Construction Co. v. Hevesi 214 AD2d 465 p. 868
- Grgas v. Mercklowitz 168 AD2d 678 at 679 p. 868