Case Name: The People of the State of New York ex rel. The Woodhaven Gas Light Company, Appellant, v. The Public Service Commission of the State of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1923-05-08
Citations: 236 N.Y. 530
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York ex rel. The Woodhaven Gas Light Company, Appellant, v. The Public Service Commission of the State of New York, Respondent.
Judges: Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughein, Crane and Andrews, JJ.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 236
Pages: 530–531

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York ex rel. The Woodhaven Gas Light Company, Appellant, v. The Public Service Commission of the State of New York, Respondent.
Gas and electricity — constitutional law — confiscatory ordei-certiorari to review direction of 'public service commission that relator extend its gas mains and service properly dismissed.
People ex rel. Woodhaven Gas Light Co. v. Public Service Comm., 203 App. Div. 369, affirmed.
(Argued April 19, 1923;
decided May 8, 1923.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 17, 1922, which dismissed a writ of certiorari and confirmed the proceedings of the public service commission in directing the relator to extend its gas mains and service in the fourth ward of the borough of Queens so as to reasonably serve with gas the residents of Locust Manor, Locust Lawn, South Jamaica Place, Springfield and Laurelton. The Appellate Division found upon the record that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the finding that there was a necessity and a demand for the extension of the relator’s service in question and that there was a duty upon the relator to supply the needs of the residents of the communities in question if practicable, and on the review of all the evidence in the case it was shown that it was practicable for the relator to make the extension of the service in question and dismissed the writ of certiorari. On this appeal from the order dismissing said writ, the relator contended that the order of the public service commission was illegal and void in that it was contrary to the pro visions of the Federal and State Constitutions which provide that the relator’s property shall not be taken without due process of law.
William N. Dykman and Jackson A. Dykman for appellant.
Edward M. Deegan and Ledyard P. Hale for Public Service Commission, respondent.
James E. Finegan for Central Gas Committee, intervening.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughein, Crane and Andrews, JJ.