On August 14, 2024, the Second Department issued a decision in Calle v. National Grid USA Serv. Co., Inc., 2024 NY Slip Op. 04190, holding that claims against a utility should be dismissed on primary jurisdiction grounds, explaining:
The doctrine of primary jurisdiction is intended to co-ordinate the relationship between courts and administrative agencies to the end that divergence of opinion between them not render ineffective the statutes with which both are concerned, and to the extent that the matter before the court is within the agency’s specialized field, to make available to the court in reaching its judgment the agency’s views concerning not only the factual and technical issues involved but also the scope and meaning of the statute administered by the agency. While concurrent jurisdiction does exist, where there is an administrative agency which has the necessary expertise to dispose of an issue, in the exercise of discretion, resort to a judicial tribunal should be withheld pending resolution of the administrative proceeding.
Here, the Public Service Commission has primary jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims. The defendant was permitted to impose a $100 fine on any customer who prevented or hindered Brooklyn Union from inspecting the gas meters and gas lines of a building. Thus, the plaintiff’s claim that she and other members of the prospective class were improperly charged a fine involves intricate questions of fact, thereby requiring the specialized knowledge and expertise of the Public Service Commission. Moreover, to the extent that the plaintiff seeks to enjoin the defendant from unfairly issuing fines to customers, this request for relief raises issues concerning whether the defendant abided by the Public Service Commission’s orders and, thus, falls within the expertise of the Public Service Commission.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).