NY's Rockland County Sues Nixon Peabody in $8.8M Malpractice Suit
The sewer district in New York's Rockland County is looking for more than $8.8 million in a malpractice lawsuit alleging its former law firm, Nixon Peabody, botched a long-running eminent domain dispute.
October 16, 2017 at 05:43 PM
18 minute read
Nixon Peabody faces an $8.8 million malpractice lawsuit alleging it bungled a long-running eminent domain dispute while representing the sewer district of New York's Rockland County against property owners who had hoped to sell a parcel of land to developers.
The suit, first reported by the Rockland County Times, arises out of an underlying case that traces its roots back to 2004. In that dispute, Nixon Peabody represented the Rockland County Sewer District against a group known as the Split Rock Partnership that once owned property near the village of Hillburn, New York.
The land in question was for the most part steep, rocky and heavily wooded, but there was a portion of it that the Split Rock group viewed as suitable for development, according to a 2012 court ruling in the underlying suit. The partners entered a $10 million contract in November 2004 with a Boston-based developer—The Wilder Cos. The developer hoped to build an office park on the site with views of New York and New Jersey. The contract contained a contingency clause that would void the development agreement if the county asserted eminent domain and reclaimed the land in a condemnation proceeding.
Looking to build a wastewater treatment plant in the area, the county sewer district did, in fact, end up retaking the land in February 2005 in an eminent domain action, paying less than $250,000 for the land and voiding Split Rock's development contract, according to the 2012 ruling. The Split Rock partners then sued, starting a lengthy court proceeding that eventually went to trial and resulted in a loss for the county.
A New York state court ordered the county sewer district, which had been represented by Nixon Peabody throughout the case, to pay $8.1 million plus interest going back to 2005. In March 2015, the county reached a settlement with Split Rock that took account of the judgment and other costs, ultimately costing Rockland County almost $16.3 million, according to the county's malpractice suit. A local news report earlier this year estimated that the eminent domain dispute and its fallout has wound up costing Rockland County taxpayers roughly $18 million.
Now, the county's sewer district, represented by Eric Dranoff of Saretsky Katz & Dranoff, is looking to recoup all legal fees, costs and expenses it paid to Nixon Peabody. The malpractice suit, filed Sept. 12, alleges that the firm made a host of mistakes during the land dispute and seeks damages of nearly $8.87 million.
The suit criticizes Nixon Peabody's decision to have an associate handle much of the case, and alleges that the firm failed to gather evidence that would have rebutted the landowners' claims about the property's true value. Nixon Peabody allegedly failed to tap a zoning expert who could have countered Split Rock's argument that the land could be rezoned to accommodate a commercial office building development, the suit said.
The county also alleges that Nixon Peabody ignored basic rules of civil procedure with respect to another potential expert witness in the field of civil engineering and site planning, a mistake that led the court in the eminent domain case to prevent that expert from testifying, according to the suit.
“[Nixon Peabody] failed to marshal evidence, including but not limited to expert testimony, questioning … Split Rock's proof in the condemnation proceeding that commercial development of the property, by construction of an office complex, was physically possible and economically feasible,” the suit said.
Nixon Peabody, in response to questions about the lawsuit, provided an emailed statement stating, “We believe these claims are without merit and we plan to defend them vigorously.”
The suit, first reported by the Rockland County Times, arises out of an underlying case that traces its roots back to 2004. In that dispute,
The land in question was for the most part steep, rocky and heavily wooded, but there was a portion of it that the Split Rock group viewed as suitable for development, according to a 2012 court ruling in the underlying suit. The partners entered a $10 million contract in November 2004 with a Boston-based developer—The Wilder Cos. The developer hoped to build an office park on the site with views of
Looking to build a wastewater treatment plant in the area, the county sewer district did, in fact, end up retaking the land in February 2005 in an eminent domain action, paying less than $250,000 for the land and voiding Split Rock's development contract, according to the 2012 ruling. The Split Rock partners then sued, starting a lengthy court proceeding that eventually went to trial and resulted in a loss for the county.
A
Now, the county's sewer district, represented by Eric Dranoff of Saretsky Katz & Dranoff, is looking to recoup all legal fees, costs and expenses it paid to
The suit criticizes
The county also alleges that
“[
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLong Island Midsize Firm and Managing Partner Sued for Sexual Harassment, Discrimination
6 minute readKing & Spalding Adds Veteran Antitrust Litigator From White & Case in New York
3 minute readTroutman Pepper Accused of Inattentive Case Management in $59M Malpractice Suit
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The American Lawyer's Top Stories of 2024
- 2Semiconductor Component Maker Accused of Deceiving Investors About Market Downturn, Export Curbs
- 3Zuckerman Spaeder Gets Ready to Move Offices in DC, Deploy AI Tools in 2025
- 4Pardoning Jan. 6 Defendants May Send Bad Message About Insurrection, Rule of Law
- 5Looming Clash Over Abortion Pills Shows Overturning 'Roe v. Wade' Settled Nothing
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250