200 Amsterdam in Manhattan, New York. Photo: Ryland West 1st Department Weighs Whether to Uphold Ruling, Lop Floors Off Top of UWS Tower
The Upper West Side building has garnered substantial attention for its potential "haircut," or the removal of already-built floors at the top of the tower.
November 18, 2020 at 07:26 PM
3 minute read
A panel of judges in the Appellate Division, First Department on Wednesday heard arguments in the case of 200 Amsterdam, the Upper West Side building that has garnered substantial attention for its potential "haircut," or the removal of already-built floors at the top of the tower.
In February, New York County Supreme Court Justice W. Franc Perry ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, the Committee for Environmentally Sound Development and the Municipal Art Society of New York, which raised zoning issues relating to the building and its 55-story height. Perry ordered the New York City Department of Buildings to compel 200 Amsterdam's owner to remove floors exceeding the bulk permitted by city zoning rules.
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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 All
Relaxing Penalties on Discovery Noncompliance Allows Criminal Cases to Get Decided on Merit
5 minute read
Bipartisan Lawmakers to Hochul Urge Greater Student Loan Forgiveness for Public-Interest Lawyers
'Playing the Clock'?: Hochul Says NY's Discovery Loophole Is to Blame for Wide Dismissal of Criminal Cases
So Who Won? Congestion Pricing Ruling Leaves Both Sides Claiming Victory, Attorneys Seeking Clarification
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1‘Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission’: Another Consequence of 'Hobby Lobby'?
- 2With DEI Rollbacks, Employment Lawyers See Potential For Targeting Corporate Commitment to Equality
- 3In-House Legal Network The L Suite Acquires Legal E-Learning Platform Luminate+
- 4In Police Shooting Case, Kavanaugh Bleeds Blue and Jackson ‘Very Very Confused’
- 5Trump RTO Mandates Won’t Disrupt Big Law Policies—But Client Expectations Might
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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
