545 Halsey Lane Props., LLC v. Town of Southampton

• Decision Date: 08 April 2015
• Docket Number: 14-cv-800 (ADS)(AYS)
• Citation: 545 Halsey Lane Props., LLC v. Town of Southampton, 14-cv-800 (ADS)(AYS) (E.D. N.Y. Apr 08, 2015)
• Parties: 545 HALSEY LANE PROPERTIES, LLC, Plaintiff, v. TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON; TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD; DENNIS FINNERTY; JOHN BLANEY; GEORGE SKIDMORE; LARRY TOLER; JOHN ZUCCARELLI; JACQUELINE LOFARO; PHILIP A. KEITH; MICHELE BERKOSKI, in her capacity as a Co-Executor of the Estate of William A. Berkoski, Jr.; JENNIFER L. CARUSO, in her capacity as a Co-Executor of the Estate of William A. Berkoski, Jr.; ROMAN ROTH; THOMAS CONKLIN; WARREN TOPPING (a.k.a JAEGGER TOPPING); ADAM HALSEY; LEE FOSTER; JOHN L. HALSEY; LAWRENCE HALSEY; HENRY KRASZEWSKI; JAMES PIKE; KATHERINE KAZANAS; ANTHONY PIAZZA; ARTHUR LUDLOW; KENNETH TILLOTSON; MICHAEL WESNOFSKE; SUSAN FALKOWSKI PARRY; and JOHN and JANE DOES Nos. 1-6, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

545 HALSEY LANE PROPERTIES, LLC, Plaintiff, v. TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON; TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON PLANNING BOARD;DENNIS FINNERTY; JOHN BLANEY; GEORGE SKIDMORE; LARRY TOLER;JOHN ZUCCARELLI; JACQUELINE LOFARO; PHILIP A. KEITH; MICHELEBERKOSKI, in her capacity as a Co-Executor of the Estate of William A. Berkoski, Jr.;JENNIFER L. CARUSO, in her capacity as a Co-Executor of the Estate of William A.Berkoski, Jr.; ROMAN ROTH; THOMAS CONKLIN; WARREN TOPPING (a.k.aJAEGGER TOPPING); ADAM HALSEY; LEE FOSTER; JOHN L. HALSEY; LAWRENCEHALSEY; HENRY KRASZEWSKI; JAMES PIKE; KATHERINE KAZANAS; ANTHONYPIAZZA; ARTHUR LUDLOW; KENNETH TILLOTSON; MICHAEL WESNOFSKE;SUSAN FALKOWSKI PARRY; and JOHN and JANE DOES Nos. 1-6, Defendants.

14-cv-800 (ADS)(AYS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

April 8, 2015

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER

APPEARANCES:

Neufeld & O'Leary

Attorneys for the Plaintiff

370 Lexington Avenue

Suite 908

New York, NY 10017

By: David Samuel Julian Neufeld, Esq.

Denis P. O'Leary, Esq., Of Counsel

Devitt Spellman Barrett, LLP

Attorneys for the Defendants

50 Route 111

Smithtown, NY 11787

By: David H. Arnsten, Esq.

Joshua S. Shteireman, Esq, Of Counsel

SPATT, District Judge.

On February 6, 2014, the Plaintiff545 Halsey Lane Properties, LLC(the "Plaintiff") commenced this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Defendants Town of Southhampton; Town of Southhampton Planning Board(the "Planning Board"); Dennis Finnerty; John Blaney; George Skidmore; Larry Toler; John Zuccarelli; Jacqueline Lofaro; Philip A. Keith; Michele Berkoski, in her capacity as a Co-Executor of the Estate of William A. Berkoski, Jr.; Jennifer L. Caruso, in her capacity as a Co-Executor of the Estate of William A. Berkowski, Jr., Roman Roth; Thomas Conklin; Warren Topping a/k/a/ Jaegger Topping; Adam Halsey; Lee Foster; John L. Halsey; Lawrence Halsey; Henry Kraszewski; James Pike; Katherine Kazanas; Anthony Piazza; Arthur Ludlow; Kenneth Tillotson; Michael Wesnofske; Susan Falkowski Parry; and John and Jane DoesNos. 1-6(collectively the "Defendants").The Plaintiff challenges two decisions by the Planning Board involving conditional approvals of the Plaintiff's applications for a building permit for the construction of a barn and/or barns on its property.

The Plaintiff also commenced two related state court proceedings pursuant to Article 78 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules("CPLR") to challenge the decisions of the Planning Board as affected by errors of law, arbitrary and capricious decisions, abuses of discretion, and decisions not supported by a rational basis.

By Memorandum of Decision and Order dated August 19, 2014, this Court denied the Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and, as to the individual defendants, on the basis of qualified immunity.545 Halsey Lane Properties, LLC v. Town of Southampton, No. 14-CV-800 (ADS)(GRB), 2014 WL 4100952(E.D.N.Y.Aug. 19, 2014).The Court's findings of law in that opinion are recounted at length later in this decision.

On November 6, 2014, the Defendants moved for an order (1) pursuant to Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526, 105 S. Ct. 2806, 86 L. Ed. 2d 411(1985)andIn re World Trade Center Disaster Site Litigation, 503 F.3d 167, 169-70(2d Cir.2007) declaring that this Court is divested of jurisdiction to proceed with pre-trial proceedings and discovery pending the disposition of their appeal of the August 19, 2014 Order and (2) pursuant to Rule 8(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure to stay the proceedings pending disposition of the Defendants' appeal.

On November 20, 2014, the Plaintiff moved for a declaratory judgment certifying the Defendants' appeal as "frivolous."

On December 11, 2014, the Court issued an order reserving decision on both the motion to stay discovery and pre-trial proceedings pending the disposition of the appeal of the August 19, 2014 Order and the motion to certify the appeal as "frivolous."The Court expressed its willingness to entertain a motion for partial reconsideration of that part of the August 19, 2014 order denying the motion to dismiss the complaint as against the Individual Defendants on the basis of qualified immunity, on the condition that the Defendants withdraw their notice of appeal without prejudice within 14 days of the date of that order.

The Defendants subsequently withdrew their notice of appeal to the Second Circuit.

On January 16, 2015, the Defendants, relying on this Court's December 11, 2014 order and a December 12, 2014 decision by Justice Daniel Martin of New York State Supreme Court, Suffolk County in the Article 78 proceedings, moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("Fed. R. Civ. P.")60(b)(2), (5), and (6) for reconsideration of the August 19, 2014 order in its entirety and to dismiss the complaint.

For the reasons set forth in this opinion, the Defendants' motion is granted in part and denied in part.

I.BACKGROUND

Unless stated otherwise, the following facts are drawn from the complaint and construed in a light most favorable to the non-moving party, the Plaintiff.

A.The Parties

The Plaintiff is a New York limited liability company.

The Defendant Town of Southampton(the "Town of Southampton") is a municipal corporation.

The Planning Board is a Board created by the Board of Southampton pursuant to New York Town Law § 271.

The DefendantDennis Finnerty("Finnerty"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member and Chairperson of the Planning Board at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantJohn Blaney("Blaney"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member and Vice Chairperson of the Planning Board at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantGeorge Skidmore("Skidmore"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the Planning Board at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantLarry Toler("Toler"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the Planning Board at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantJohn Zuccarelli("Zuccarelli"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the Planning Board at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantPhilip A. Keith("Keith"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the Planning Board at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantMichele Berkoski, sued in her capacity as an Executor of the Estate of William A. Berkoski, Jr., having been issued Letters Testamentary by the Surrogate's Court of the County of Suffolk on or about May 12, 2011, is sued herein on account of the individual actions of William A. Berkoski, Jr.("Berkoski"), who was a member of the Planning Board at the relevant times herein prior to his death on or about March 15, 2011.

The DefendantJennifer L. Caruso, sued in her capacity as an Executor of the Estate of Berkoski, having been issued Letters Testamentary by the Surrogate's Court of the County of Suffolk on or about May 12, 2011, is sued herein on account of the individual actions of Berkoski.

The DefendantRoman Roth("Roth"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the Town of Southampton's Agricultural Advisory Committee(the "AAC") at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantThomas Conklin("Conklin"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantWarren Topping, also known as Jaegger Topping("Topping"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantAdam Halsey("A. Halsey"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantLee Foster("Foster"), sued in her individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantJohn L. Halsey("J. Halsey"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantLawrence Halsey("L. Halsey"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantHenry Kraszewski("Kraszewski"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantJames Pike("Pike"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantKatherine Kazanas("Kazanas"), sued in her individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantAnthony Piazza("Piazza"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantArthur Ludlow("Ludlow"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantKenneth Tillotson("Tillotson"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantMichael Wesnofske("Wesnofske"), sued in his individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The DefendantSusan Falkowski Parry("Parry"), sued in her individual capacity, is and/or was a member of the AAC at the relevant times herein.

The Defendants John and Jane DoeNos. 1 through 6 are presently unknown individuals or entities who, according to the Plaintiff, may be liable to the Plaintiff.

B.The Factual Allegations

By deed dated February 26, 2003, the Plaintiff purchased a 40.747 acre parcel of property located in the Town of Southampton, known as Suffolk County Tax MapNo. 900-105.000-0001-001.030(the "Property").The purchase price remitted by or on behalf of the Plaintiff for the Property was $15,150,000.

The Property is identified on a subdivision map known as the Map of Broadlands, approved by the Planning Board on July 3, 1980, and filed in the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk on August 29, 1980, as MapNo. 6930.All or...