Moore v. Ruback's Grove Campers' Ass'n Inc.

• Decision Date: 02 June 2011
• Citation: 85 A.D.3d 1220,924 N.Y.S.2d 197,2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 04555
• Parties: Robert MOORE, et al., Respondents,v.RUBACK'S GROVE CAMPERS' ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

85 A.D.3d 1220
924 N.Y.S.2d 197
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 04555

Robert MOORE, et al., Respondents,
v.
RUBACK'S GROVE CAMPERS' ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

June 2, 2011.

[924 N.Y.S.2d 198]

Lemery Greisler, L.L.C., Albany (James E. Braman of counsel), for appellant.Englert, Coffey, McHugh & Fantauzzi, L.L.P., Schenectady (Peter V. Coffey of counsel), for respondents.Before: PETERS, J.P., SPAIN, ROSE, STEIN and EGAN JR., JJ.ROSE, J.

[85 A.D.3d 1220] Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Williams, J.), entered May 28, 2009 in Saratoga County, which granted plaintiff Robert Moore a permanent injunction.

Defendant is an incorporated, not-for-profit membership association that owns an 84–acre campground located on Galway Lake in Saratoga County with 110 campsite lots leased to its members on a long-term basis for an annual rent of $10. Pursuant to their leases, members may use their lot “as a camp site for the erection and maintenance of a camp or summer cottage, and for no other use whatsoever.” Also pursuant to their leases, members agree to maintain their membership in defendant and to abide by all of its rules and regulations. Defendant maintains a security gate at the main entrance, which it locks each year from January 1 until after the spring thaw, prohibiting vehicular access. Plaintiffs, who are leaseholders and members of defendant, commenced this action seeking, among other things, a permanent injunction preventing defendant from obstructing the road into the campground. Simultaneously, plaintiff Robert Moore filed a petition seeking the same relief. In support of the requested permanent injunction, Moore relied on paragraph eight of the lease, which provides that “neither party will close or obstruct any road now in use by the lessee or any lot or any road shown upon said map, except that [defendant] may maintain [a] gate on [the] road leading to [the] camp grounds.”

Defendant opposed the petition, arguing that it should be treated as a motion for a preliminary injunction and denied. Defendant submitted evidence in opposition describing a long history of the roads being closed from January 1 until after the [85 A.D.3d 1221] spring thaw in order to preserve the unique seasonal character of the community and protect the roadways, which were not built to withstand snowplowing or to support vehicles during the spring thaw. Although Supreme Court referred to the petition as a motion, the court permanently enjoined...