Property owners commenced a lawsuit alleging damages when property that they allegedly planned to develop was landmarked by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. The City moved to dismiss certain claims concerning its decision to landmark the property on grounds that these claims were not ripe for adjudication and for failure to state a claim. The magistrate judge recommended that the motion be granted, holding that the landmark decision was not ripe because the property owners did not allege in their complaint that the City had denied their application to develop the property as a result of the designation. In addition, the court held that the complaint failed to state a claim with respect to the owners’ allegation that the City landmarked the house in retaliation for them painting it with bright colors given that the complaint failed to allege a causal connection between the two events. Further, the court held that the owners failed to state a claim with respect to their due process and equal protection claims given that the complaint failed to allege that the owners pursued an Article 78 proceeding and because they failed to demonstrate that they were a protected class respectively.
Grossi v. City of New York, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110694 (E.D.N.Y. 12/1/2009)
This abstract appears in the March 2010 issue of Environmental Law in New York
