Hubbard v. Town of Sand Lake
| Decision Date | 04 January 1996 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Warren HUBBARD, Sr., Petitioner, v. TOWN OF SAND LAKE, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Kingsley & Towne P.C. (James T. Towne Jr., of counsel), Albany, for petitioner.
Bond, Schoeneck & King (Carl Rosenbloom, of counsel), Albany, for respondent.
Before MIKOLL, J.P., and MERCURE, CREW and YESAWICH, JJ.
Proceeding initiated in this court pursuant to EDPL 207 to review a determination of respondent which condemned a portion of petitioner's land upon which respondent's landfill is located.
The relevant facts are set forth in this court's prior decision in a related proceeding in this matter (Matter of Hubbard v. Town of Sand Lake, 211 A.D.2d 1005, 622 N.Y.S.2d 126). Briefly, respondent leased from petitioner's predecessor-in-interest certain real property located in the Town of Sand Lake, Rensselaer County, for use as a sanitary landfill. The lease was set to expire in June 1994. In April 1993, the State Department of Environmental Conservation (hereinafter DEC) ordered the closure of the landfill due to violations of certain permit requirements and regulatory standards, and respondent was directed to monitor and maintain the property for 30 years. In an effort to facilitate compliance with that order, respondent attempted to acquire a long-term interest in petitioner's property. When the parties were unable to reach an agreement, respondent sought to acquire the property by eminent domain. Respondent's initial determination and findings condemning the property were annulled by this court due to respondent's failure to comply with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ECL art 8) (hereinafter SEQRA) (see, Matter of Hubbard v. Town of Sand Lake, supra ).
In February 1995, following appropriate notice, a public hearing was held on the proposed acquisition. Following this hearing, respondent issued its determination and findings, concluding that it was in the public interest to acquire the property in order to ensure compliance with DEC's order. Petitioner thereafter commenced this proceeding pursuant to EDPL 207 seeking to annul respondent's determination.
Petitioner initially contends that respondent's determination must be annulled because (1) respondent failed to establish a valid public use for condemnation of the property, (2) respondent acted in bad faith in condemning the property, and (3) respondent's condemnation of the entire 37 acres at issue was excessive. A review of the briefs and petition filed in the prior proceeding in this matter (see, id.) reveals, however, that these very arguments were previously considered and rejected by this court, and there is no indication that petitioner did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate those issues in that proceeding. Accordingly, petitioner is barred by the principles of res judicata and collateral estoppel from relitigating these issues in this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mobil Oil Corp. v. City of Syracuse Indus. Development Agency
...182, 186, 468 N.Y.S.2d 240, revd on other grounds 63 N.Y.2d 985, 483 N.Y.S.2d 997, 473 N.E.2d 247; see, Matter of Hubbard v. Town of Sand Lake, 223 A.D.2d 794, 635 N.Y.S.2d 360; Matter of Village of Johnson City v. Bolas, 157 A.D.2d 1009, 1010, 550 N.Y.S.2d 494; Matter of Acres Storage Co. ......
-
Colao v. Village of Ellenville
... ... Town Bd. of Town of New Windsor, 97 A.D.2d 500, 501, 468 N.Y.S.2d 18 ... ...
-
Plattekill Mountain Ski Chalet, LLC v. SKI Plattekill, Inc.
...683 N.Y.S.2d 661 [1999];Clute v. State of New York, 243 A.D.2d 936, 938, 664 N.Y.S.2d 637 [1997];Matter of Hubbard v. Town of Sand Lake, 223 A.D.2d 794, 795–796, 635 N.Y.S.2d 360 [1996],lv. denied88 N.Y.2d 808, 647 N.Y.S.2d 713, 670 N.E.2d 1345 [1996] ). While it is true that County Court i......
-
Bressette v. Travis
...opportunity to litigate the issue, petitioner is precluded from relitigating it now (see generally, Matter of Hubbard v. Town of Sand Lake, 223 A.D.2d 794, 795-796, 635 N.Y.S.2d 360, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 808, 647 N.Y.S.2d 713, 670 N.E.2d 1345). Moreover, even if we were to address this issu......