Village Green at Sayville, LLC v. The Town of Islip et al
| Village Green at Sayville, LLC |
| Kevin Brown, Angie M. Carpenter, John C. Cochrane, Jr., Daniel DeLuca, Joseph DeVincent, Donald Fiore, Steven J. Flotteron, Edward Friedland, Michael Kennedy, Mary Kate Mullen, Anthony Musumeci, The Planning Board of The Town of Islip, The Town Board of the Town of Islip, The Town of Islip and Trish Bergin Weichbrodt |
| 2:2017cv07391 |
| December 19, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Central Islip Office |
| Denis R. Hurley |
| Arlene R. Lindsay |
| Civil Rights: Accomodations |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Fair Housing Act |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
49
ORDER granting 44 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 45 Cross Motion for Reconsideration: For the reasons discussed in the attached Order, Defendants' renewed motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's motion t o reargue the Court's 34 Order is GRANTED with respect to the futility exception but DENIED with respect to standing for Fair Housing Act claims. On reconsideration, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED. This Court has now dismissed all seven causes of action. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and terminate the action. Ordered by Judge Denis R. Hurley on 1/22/2021. (Ready, John)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 28 : Defendants' motions to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) is granted as to: Plaintiff's first cause of action for violations of the FHA; fourth cause of action for violations of 42 U.S.C. 7; 1983 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; sixth cause of action for violations of substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment;and seventh cause of action for violations of the takings clause of the Fifth and Four teenth Amendments. Plaintiff's Rule 12(b)(1) motion is denied without prejudice to renew as to Plaintiff's second cause of action for violations of § 1981; third cause of action for violations of § 1982; and fifth cause of action for violations of the NYSHRL. Defendants' motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule12(b)(6) is likewise denied without prejudice to renew, as the Court may or may not have subject matter jurisdiction to consider these claims on the merits. As such, Def endants are directed to file a renewed motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), limited to the question of whether a final decision is required to establish standing and ripeness for § 1981, § 1982, and NYSHRL claims. Defendants may als o renew their prior motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), but neither side shall alter their previous briefing on this motion unless permission of the Court is first sought and obtained. Defendants shall serve but not file their moving papers on or before October 18, 2019; Plaintiff shall serve but not file opposing papers on or before November 1, 2019; and Defendants shall serve reply papers, if any, and file all papers with the Court, including a courtesy copy for Chambers, on or before November 8, 2019. See attached Order. Ordered by Judge Denis R. Hurley on 9/27/2019. (Bochner, Francesca)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
