Opinion ID: 2167556
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Common-Law Taxpayer Standing

Text: In Boryszewski v Brydges (37 N.Y.2d 361), this Court held that a taxpayer would have the legal standing to challenge governmental action if the failure to accord such standing would be in effect to erect an impenetrable barrier to any judicial scrutiny of legislative action ( id. , at 364). This rule is not implicated in the instant action. First, petitioners do not seek review of any legislative action. Second, no impenetrable barrier exists. Any of the bidders whose proposals were rejected by DSS could have brought suit to challenge the contract award made to Citicorp ( see , Weimer v Board of Educ. , 52 N.Y.2d 148, 155; Matter of Altamore v Barrios-Paoli , 90 N.Y.2d 378, 384 [same]). For the reasons stated, Rivera has no standing either pursuant to State Finance Law § 123-b or under the common law because of her status as a taxpayer and a government benefits recipient. Because petitioners lack standing to sue, we reach no other substantive issues. Accordingly, in each appeal, the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. In each case: Order affirmed, with costs.