« It's Orwellian, almost: the Courier-Life's Witt salutes a heckler's veto and wrongly claims DDDB sought ministers' "protection" | Main | DDDB PRESS RELEASE: Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn & 25 Community Groups Ask NY State's High Court to Hear Their Appeal Challenging the Atlantic Yards Blight Designation, Charging Bias and Corruption By the ESDC »
August 4, 2009
In eminent domain brief, an effort to include recent episodes (MTA, etc.) and a reliance on Catterson's concurrence
Atlantic Yards Report
There are a couple of interesting aspects to the brief filed Friday (and announced yesterday) on behalf of nine renters and property owners challenging eminent domain for Atlantic Yards in the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals. (Oral argument will be October 14.)
First, while the original case was filed in state court in August 2008--after a federal case filed in 2006 was ultimately rejected--the new brief makes ample citation of recent episodes that bolster the argument that the state is bending over backwards to accommodate developer Forest City Ratner. Whether such information and argument will be admissible is another question.
Also, in describing the action of the condemning authority, the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), the brief also makes ample citation of Justice James Catterson’s February 2009 concurrence in the Appellate Division’s decision upholding the ESDC’s environmental review.
Though Catterson felt compelled to concur in the result, his opinion was scathing, with the tone of a dissent. (Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, which has organized and funded both cases, also is asking the Court of Appeals to consider the environmental case, in which it and 25 other groups are petitioners.)
Click thru for Oder's excellent analysis of the legal claims.
Posted by eric at August 4, 2009 11:59 AM