In People v. Witherspoon (52 Misc 2d 320 [Dist Ct, Suffolk County 1966]), the court held that a town's zoning ordinance concerning billboards and advertising signs was applicable to an advertising company that leased land from the Long Island Rail Road Company, and its statutory successor, the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Authority. The court in Witherspoon analyzed the exemption from local law under Public Authorities Law 1266 (8) as a question of governmental immunity from zoning regulations, and therefore applied a test of governmental immunity. The court stated, "If the function be governmental, then the immunity may be deemed to apply. If the function be proprietary, then the immunity may not apply." (Id. at 321.) The court also stated: "The prime purpose for the legislation was the guarantee of the continued operation of the railroad; the right to manage, direct and control the real property is incidental thereto. Insofar as such management, direction or control is directed towards the actual operation, the function is governmental. Insofar as such management, direction or control is incidental to the actual operation, the function is proprietary." (Id. at 322-23.) The court reasoned that the use of property was proprietary, because "the erection and maintenance of commercial advertising signs--has no direct bearing to the governmental function for which the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Authority was created." (Id. at 323.)