From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

L.I. Pine Barrens v. Town Board East Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 15, 2002
293 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

April 15, 2002.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review determinations of the respondent municipalities date April 12, 2000, and April 26, 2000, granting approvals for sundry unrelated developments in Suffolk County, the petitioners appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), dated December 8, 2000, which, among other things, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Before: Smith, J.P., Goldstein, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order and 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, since 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 (SEQRA; 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; Long Is. Pine Barrens Socy. v. Planning Bd. of Town of Brookhaven, 213 A.D.2d 484). The orgizational petitioners similarly lack standing, since they have failed to demonstrate that one or more of their individual members would have standing to sue (see Long Is. Pine Barrens Socy. v. Planning Bd. of Town of Brookhave, supra).

The petitioners' remaining contentions need not be addressed in light of our determination.

The instant case demonstrates the legal barriers to securing any cumulative impact review of development in the Long Island Pine Barrens. The petitioners' frustration with the legal process is understandable. However, it is the province of the Legislature to fashion a solution to this problem (see Long Is. Pine Barrens Socy. v. Planning Bd. of Town of Brookhave, 80 N.Y.2d 500, 515).


Summaries of

L.I. Pine Barrens v. Town Board East Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 15, 2002
293 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

L.I. Pine Barrens v. Town Board East Hampton

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: Apr 15, 2002

Citations

293 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
741 N.Y.S.2d 80

Citing Cases

Sierra Club v. Vill. of Painted Post

Nor does the court address whether compliance with SEQRA in this case means that the kind of comprehensive…

Coal. to Protect N.Y. v. Vill. of Painted Post (In re Sierra Club)

Nor does the court address whether compliance with SEQRA in this case means that the kind of comprehensive…