Medallion taxicab owners and their representatives, association of credit union leaders and credit unions that financed medallion purchases, and city council member brought action against state and mayor, among others, challenging constitutionality of statute which permitted livery vehicles to accept street hails in outer boroughs and allowed sale of new medallions for wheelchair-accessible medallion taxicabs.
The Court of Appeals held that:
- Statute addressed matter of substantial state concern, as required for enactment of special law without home rule message;
- Statute bore reasonable relationship to state’s substantial interests;
- Statute did not violate Double Enactment Clause; and
- Statute did not violate Exclusive Privileges Clause.