Of Ham Sandwiches and Eminent Domain Procedures
This article presents a number of examples that will make the practitioner aware that interpreting the EDPL is far from settled and that practitioners may have an uphill battle and high burden to overcome in seeking to challenge under EDPL.
August 23, 2023 at 10:00 AM
14 minute read
In New York, a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich and a municipality can take private property using eminent domain. Indeed, there is little judicial oversight in eminent domain proceedings and courts grant great deference to condemnors' justifications for using eminent domain.
As Judge James Catterson concurred in Uptown Holdings, LLC v. City of New York, "Unfortunately for the rights of the citizens affected by the proposed condemnation, the recent rulings of the Court of Appeals in Matter of Goldstein v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 13 N.Y.3d 511 [] (2009) and Matter of Kaur v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 15 N.Y.3d 235 [] (2010), have made plain that there is no longer any judicial oversight of eminent domain proceedings." 77 A.D.3d 434, 437 (1st Dept. 2010).
And as Judge Robert Smith noted in his Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corporation dissent, municipalities are judges over their own causes in determining when the public use requirement is satisfied. 13 N.Y.3d 511, 552 (2009) ("To let the agency itself determine when the public use requirement is satisfied is to make the agency a judge in its own cause.").
This content has been archived.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 AllThe Elliott Management vs. Southwest Airlines Faceoff: Who Won and What Determined the Outcome?
7 minute readNot All Secrets Are Trade Secrets: SDNY Examines the Limits of NDA Protection
13 minute readTrending Stories
- 1SEC Chair Gary Gensler to Resign on Trump's Inauguration Day
- 2How I Made Partner: 'Develop a Practice Area You Really Care About ,' Says Jennifer Gniady of Stradley Ronon
- 3Indian Billionaire Gautam Adani Indicted in Brooklyn for Alleged Orchestration of $250 Million Bribery Plot
- 4St. Ivo: Patron Saint of Lawyers
- 5Eagle Pharma Founder Sues Company to Recoup Cost of SEC Investigation
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