“APP WARS” In New York City!!! The TLC’S E-HAIL Pilot Program: Litigation Overview & Update
In late 2012, the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission (the “TLC”) proposed rules to allow for smartphone applications to be used with taxicabs – the “E-Hail Rules.” However, the proposed E-Hail Rules were heavily protested by the for-hire industry at the November 29, 2012 TLC hearing. As a result of the opposition, the E-Hail Rules were roughly transformed into a pilot program, which was proposed and approved by the TLC in a Resolution dated December 13, 2012 (the “E-Hail Program”). The E-Hail Program, among other things, permitted E-Hails to all taxicabs by licensed application providers for a period of one year. The E-Hail Program was scheduled to commence upon the approval of the first application provider, no earlier than February 15, 2013.In furtherance of the heavy opposition to the E-Hail Program, on February 14, 2013, a coalition of black car and livery companies (collectively, the “Petitioners”), pursuant to emergency court procedures, requested a temporary restraining order to strike down the E-Hail Program and prohibit the Respondents1 from implementing and/or moving going forward with the E-Hail Program. Of note, the litigation was initially assigned to Justice Arthur Engoron, the same judge who heard and decided the Street Hail Livery Law Suit (filed and decided in 2012),2 but after a highly unusual series of twists and turns with several recusals and judge assignment disputes, the case is now firmly before Justice Carol Huff.
To read more about the E-Hail program, and petition details, please visit the TLC website at:
http://www.tlc-mag.com/in_focus_apr13.html
GOING MY WAY?” -- The Proliferation of Rogue Ridesharing Services By Matthew W. Daus, Esq. & Jasmine K. Le Veaux, Esq.Transportation Practice Group
The California Public Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) voted in December 2012 to institute rulemaking on regulations relating to passenger carriers, ridesharing, and new online-enabled transportation services. In California, rideshare transportation is exempt from regulation when it involves the transportation of persons between home and work locations and when such transportation is incidental to the driver. This exemption does not apply if the primary purpose for the transportation is to make a profit. As such, further investigation and information gathering is necessary for the Commission to fully evaluate the operations of companies like Lyft and SideCar in order to determine whether California regulations must be changed to address a “new” form of transportation, or, whether these are merely for-hire transportation companies in disguise, and as such, existing regulations and licensing requirements need simply to be enforced.
The International Association of Transportation Regulators (“IATR”) has been on the front lines of the discourse regarding technology transportation companies and recently submitted comments to California’s Rulemaking Proceeding regarding Ridesharing. A pre-hearing conference and workshops to address the issues raised throughout the comment-sharing process will likely be scheduled in the near future. The Commission has been in contact with the IATR, and we have been working with the agency on adoption in California of our model regulations (the latest draft of which can be found at www.windelsmarx.com)15. The IATR’s public comments to the Commission can also be accessed on the website of Windels Marx Lane & Mittendorf, LLP.16