United States Second Circuit

In a case concerning whether defendant city has impeded plaintiff's access to the city telecommunications market by unlawfully denying plaintiff the use of city-owned poles, dismissal of plaintiff's claims for damages is affirmed, however, dismissal of claims for declarative and injunctive relief are reversed where the district court erred in holding that: 1) plaintiff has an adequate remedy in damages and could not establish irreparable harm; 2) the availability of an action for damages under section 1983 weighed against the granting of declarative relief; and 3) it would be "inappropriate" to grant such relief in light of the expiration of a city resolution and a Request for Proposals.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/15/2008
• Published 01/15/2008

Judges

• RAKOFF, District Judge., Before:  KEARSE and HALL, Circuit Judges, and RAKOFF, District Judge.

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• T. Scott Thompson (David M. Shapiro on the brief), Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Washington, D.C., for Plaintiff-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Karen M. Griffin, Assistant Corporation Counsel (Francis F. Caputo, Bruce Regal, Diana M. Murray on the brief), for Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, New York, N.Y., for Defendants-Appellees.