The courts decided 37 cases under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) in 2010.1 That is the lowest number since this column began its annual survey of SEQRA cases in 1990. The second lowest number was 45 in 2009. This trough is most likely caused by the economic recession, as SEQRA activity primarily relates to real estate development.
As is usually the case, defendants were much more likely to win in cases where an environmental impact statement (EIS) had been prepared than when there was no EIS. Of the 16 cases with an EIS, defendants won 13 (81 percent); of the 19 cases without an EIS, defendants won 13 (68 percent). (The remaining cases were unclassifiable.) Thus preparing an EIS continues to be generally the safest course from a litigation perspective.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
