Second Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Selective Enforcement and Equal Protection Claims in Treehouse Permitting Case

Second Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Selective Enforcement and Equal Protection Claims in Treehouse Permitting Case

This post was authored by Amy Lavine, Esq. in Lepper v. Scordinothe Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of selective enforcement and class-of-one equal protection claims involving a treehouse that was built without a permit. The court first explained that on a selective enforcement claim, a plaintiff must show that “(1) the person, compared with others similarly situated, was selectively treated, and (2) the selective treatment was motivated by an intention to discriminate on the basis of impermissible considerations, such as race or religion, to punish or inhibit the exercise of constitutional rights, or by a malicious or…
Second Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Selective Enforcement and Equal Protection Claims in Treehouse Permitting Case

Second Circuit Court of Appeals Denies Intervention in TCA Case, Citing Adequate Representation and Avoidance of Delay

This post was authored by Amy Lavine, Esq. in Extenet Systems, LLC v. Village of Kings Pointthe Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of eight residents’ motion to intervene in a lawsuit brought by ExteNet against the village for violations of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The court rejected the residents’ claims that intervention was necessary to protect their properties from the alleged aesthetic and economic impacts that would be caused by the installation of wireless cellular equipment on nearby properties. As the court explained, it was reasonable for the district court to conclude that the residents’ interests…
Second Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Selective Enforcement and Equal Protection Claims in Treehouse Permitting Case

NY Appellate Court Dismisses SEQRA and Consistency with LWRP and Zoning Ordinance Claims Finding the Matter Moot

Posted by: Patricia Salkin | June 30, 2023 NY Appellate Court Dismisses SEQRA and Consistency with LWRP and Zoning Ordinance Claims Finding the Matter Moot Petitioners brought an Article 78 proceeding to annul the determination of the Erie Canal Harbor Development Corporation issuing a negative declaration pursuant to SEQRA with respect to a construction project and to annual the determination of the City of Buffalo that the project was consistent with the City’s Local Waterfront Revitalization Program and the City’s zoning ordinance. However, the petitioner did not move for preliminary injunctive relief to enjoin the construction from continuing pending the…
Personal Injury Lawyers Toronto |  Diamond and Diamond Lawyers

Personal Injury Lawyers Toronto | Diamond and Diamond Lawyers

The most immediate concerns after a car accident are your health and your legal obligations. First, you should be evaluated by a physician for any injuries. Not all car accident injuries are obvious. Brain injuries can be essential invisible, and other conditions may not show symptoms for hours or days after a car accident due to adrenaline and shock. Next, you want to collect as much information about the accident as possible. Get all relevant information such as license plate numbers, names, locations, insurance providers, and other details and organize it. If there were any witnesses present at the scene,…
Mastrian – Spring 2023 – MJEAL

Mastrian – Spring 2023 – MJEAL

What’s Going on With Wetlands? The Supreme Court Takes Another Dive into the “Waters of the US” Sarah Matrian Social media was once inundated with the question “is water wet?” But are wet(land) water? The Supreme Court has been asked to determine this very question and the justices will once again attempt to define the boundaries of the Clean Water Act. Depending on the outcome, certain federal protections for wetlands could either be washed away or shored up. Water is a way of life in Michigan. Beyond manufacturing and industry, a significant portion of Michigan’s revenue is generated from recreation…
Second Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Selective Enforcement and Equal Protection Claims in Treehouse Permitting Case

WA Court of Appeals Finds Policy in City’s Comprehensive Plan Regarding Commercial Uses in Industrial Areas Did Not Apply to Centers and Shelters

This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq. In 2018, the City of Puyallup adopted the Puyallup Municipal Ordinance (PMO) 3179, which established a new chapter of the Puyallup Municipal Code—chapter 20.72 (PMC 20.72). This new code chapter restricted the sites of day use centers and overnight shelters serving people experiencing homelessness within the City. The ordinance permitted such centers and shelters only in industrial zones in a small corner of the City that was distant from any services and had almost no access to transit. Siting anywhere else in the City required approval from a majority of Puyallup’s city…
Second Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Selective Enforcement and Equal Protection Claims in Treehouse Permitting Case

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals Dismisses First Amendment Challenges to Adult-Entertainment Ordinance

This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq. In 2003, the City of Augusta, Georgia enacted an adult-entertainment ordinance with the stated purpose of combating negative secondary effects associated with adult-oriented businesses. The owners and operators of two longstanding nude-dancing clubs in downtown Augusta, the Discotheque Lounge and Joker’s Lounge, sued the City and others claiming that the ordinance and related regulations violated the First Amendment. The district court granted summary judgment to the City on some claims and held that the plaintiffs lacked standing on other claims, and this appeal followed. On appeal, Plaintiffs first argued that the 2003…
Injury Lawyers Toronto |  Sokoloff Lawyers

Injury Lawyers Toronto | Sokoloff Lawyers

Sokoloff Lawyers are committed to protecting your privacy. This Privacy Policy outlines how we handle your personal information to protect your privacy. Privacy Legislation:Since January 1, 2004, all Canadian organizations engaged in commercial activities have been required to comply with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (“PIPEDA”) and the Canadian Standards Association Model Code for the Protection of Personal Information incorporated by reference into PIPEDA . These obligations extend to lawyers and law firms, including Sokoloff Lawyers. As a services firm, we have professional and ethical obligations to keep confidential the information we receive in the context of…