From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Long Island Pine Barrens v. Supervisor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 2003
301 A.D.2d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2001-11074

Argued December 13, 2002.

January 13, 2003.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the respondent Planning Board of the Town of Southampton dated March 29, 2001, granting site-plan approval to the respondent Bridgehampton Road Races Corp., and numerous other determinations of the respondent municipalities granting sundry approvals to developments in Suffolk County, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), entered December 6, 2001, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding on the ground, inter alia, of lack of standing.

Regina Seltzer, Bellport, N.Y., for appellants.

David J. Gilmartin, Jr., Town Attorney, Southampton, N.Y. (Kimberly A. Judd of counsel), for respondents Town of Southampton, Zoning Board of Appeals of Town of Southampton, and Planning Board of the Town of Southampton.

Robert J. Cimino, County Attorney, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Jennifer B. Kohn and Derrick J. Robinson of counsel), for respondents County of Suffolk and Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Esseks, Hefter Angel, Riverhead, N.Y. (William W. Esseks and Anthony C. Pasca of counsel), and Stroock Stroock Lavan, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Joseph L. Forstadt of counsel), for respondent Bridgehampton Road Races Corporation (one brief filed).

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., HOWARD MILLER, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The individual petitioners did not meet their burden of establishing their standing to sue. They failed to indicate how the proposed land uses would cause them an injury in fact, different from that suffered by the public at large, within the zone of interest that the State Environmental Quality Review Act (see ECL art 8) is intended to protect (see Society of Plastics Indus. v. County of Suffolk, 77 N.Y.2d 761, 773-774; Matter of Rediker v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Philipstown, 280 A.D.2d 548; Matter of Long Is. Pine Barrens Socy. v. Town of Brookhaven, 213 A.D.2d 484). The organizational petitioners similarly lack standing, since they failed to demonstrate that one or more of their individual members would have standing to sue (see Matter of Long Is. Pine Barrens Socy. v. Town of Brookhaven, supra).

The petitioners' remaining contentions are without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Long Island Pine Barrens v. Supervisor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 2003
301 A.D.2d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Long Island Pine Barrens v. Supervisor

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF LONG ISLAND PINE BARRENS SOCIETY, INC., ET AL.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 13, 2003

Citations

301 A.D.2d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
753 N.Y.S.2d 734

Citing Cases

Long Island Pine Barrens Soc'y, Inc. v. Cent. Pine Barrens Joint Planning & Policy Comm‘n

With regard to the standing of the Long Island Pine Barrens Society as a petitioner, the law is clear that at…

SHELTER ISLAND ASSO. v. ZBA

the original petition and claimed to represent several hundred residents and property owners in the Town of…