Sanctions Sought Against Edison School District Over Its Overcrowding Lawsuit
The Edison Board of Education resorted to litigation amid what it deems a crisis brought on by crowded school buildings that is made worse by new home construction in the town.
May 30, 2019 at 06:16 PM
3 minute read
A legal battle between the school district and municipal government in Edison, triggered by classroom overcrowding, has prompted allegations of frivolous litigation.
The Edison Board of Education sued the township Zoning Board of Adjustment in Middlesex County Superior Court on May 9, seeking to overturn variances granted to an eight-unit housing complex. The school district resorted to litigation amid what it deems a crisis brought on by crowded school buildings that is made worse by new home construction in the town.
But the zoning board responded on Tuesday with allegations that the Board of Education lacks standing to bring the suit. The zoning board letter placed the Board of Education on notice of the intent to seek sanctions for frivolous litigation as well as attorney fees and costs pursuant to the Frivolous Lawsuits Statute.
The Board of Education is seeking to invalidate variances that the zoning board granted for the construction of two buildings, each consisting of four three-bedroom units, on April 30. The suit said the zoning board lacked a basis to grant a use variance for multifamily buildings in a zone where they are not permitted; for buildings that are 36 feet in height, in a zone with a maximum building height of 30 feet; and a side-yard setback variance. The zoning board's failure to provide testimony from a licensed professional architect provided an inadequate record for subsequent witnesses to rely on, the suit claims. Therefore, the zoning board's action was arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable, and warrants invalidation by the court, according to the plaintiff.
The lawsuit also took issue with the developer's estimate that the eight housing units would generate only two additional school-aged children. That estimate is clearly a “miscalculation that would only add to the overcrowding issue,” the suit claims.
In addition, the school district's suit took issue with the failure of the township planner to advise the zoning board on “whether there were other viable alternatives for a less intensive residential development of the property.”
Bhavini Shah, an Edison attorney representing the zoning board, said they will seek sanctions if the Board of Education's claims are not withdrawn within 28 days. Shah said that the estimate that the eight new homes would account for only two school-age children was based on an accepted formula and not a subjective estimate. She added that the Board of Education's claim that the variance approval was arbitrary was belied by the fact that the zoning board listened to more than three hours of testimony from an assortment of witnesses, with significant dialogue between board members and experts.
Ramon Rivera of Scarinci & Hollenbeck in Lyndhurst, who represents the Board of Education, did not respond to a request for comment about the suit.
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 AllWhere CFPB Enforcement Stops Short on Curbing School Lunch Fees, Class Action Complaint Steps Up
5 minute readFrom 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Roller Coaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
6 minute readNJ Justices Provide A Sensible Decision on the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-77
- 2Ex-CFO of San Francisco Law Firms Pleads Guilty to $1.3M Embezzlement Scheme, DOJ Announces
- 3What Does Ohio Supreme Court's Opioid Decision Mean for Public Nuisance Claims?
- 4Bucking Industry Trend, Sidley Austin Elects Biggest Class of Partners in Firm History
- 5US Judge Throws Out Sale of Infowars to The Onion. But That's Not the End of the Road for Sandy Hook Families
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