Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Although the federal constitution protects against deprivation of property without due process, the Second Circuit and federal district courts have erected significant barriers to due process claims by landowners who challenge municipal permit denials or revocations. Arizona Hudson Valley, LLC v. Allen, 2023 WL 3936640, illustrates three of those barriers: ripeness, the narrow definition of property for due process purposes, and the outrageous governmental conduct courts require to sustain a due process claim.
Developer purchased a resort property with the intention of redeveloping and expanding the site. Developer received site plan approval and a special use permit. Disgruntled neighbors then brought a state court challenge, contending that there were questions about the use category that applied to the proposed plan. State Supreme Court granted the petition in part, holding that the planning board had acted on an unclear record in granting the permit. The court remanded to the board, which again granted the permit. One of the neighbors brought a second article 78 challenge, and while the challenge was pending, the local political landscape shifted. The town building inspector revoked the special use permit and the town created a zoning task force to suggest legislation to the town board. Developer appealed the permit revocation, but the appeal languished in the zoning board of appeals for six months, allegedly to allow time for enactment of new legislation that would block the development. At that point, the developer brought a federal action in the Northern District of New York under 42 USC §1983 contending that the town had violated its procedural and substantive due process rights. The town moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.