News & Analysis as of

Appeals › Real Estate Development › Motion to Dismiss

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard,...

Stormwater Runoff/Residential Development: Arkansas Court of Appeals Addresses Jurisdictional Issue

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard,... on

The Court of Appeals of Arkansas (“Court”) addressed in a May 14th Opinion a jurisdictional dispute involving alleged residential development stormwater runoff issues. See Centofante, et al. v. Ferguson, 2025 WL 1386368. ...more

Miller Starr Regalia

First District Affirms Judgment Dismissing CEQA Action Based On Petitioner’s Failure To Join Indispensable Real Party Developer...

Miller Starr Regalia on

In an opinion filed May 14, and later ordered published on June 11, 2025, the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 3) affirmed a judgment dismissing a CEQA action challenging an approval for a City parking lot...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Appeals Court Reinstates Legal Challenge to Local Law 97 Governing Emissions of Greenhouse Gases by Big Buildings in New York City

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In April 2019, the New York City Council passed Local Law 97 (“LL 97”) as part of the Climate Mobilization Act. LL 97 imposes strict restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions for buildings 25,000 square feet or larger and...more

Farrell Fritz, P.C.

Time-Frames for Prosecuting an Article 78 Challenge May Be Shorter Than You Think

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

In Rimler v. City of New York, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 03599 (2d Dept, May 8, 2019), which involved a challenge to the issuance of a negative declaration, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed a judgment of the...more

Farrell Fritz, P.C.

Appellate Division Revives Challenge to New York City’s Moratorium on Hotel Conversions

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

In Real Estate Bd. of New York, Inc. v. City of New York, Petitioner-Plaintiff Real Estate Board of New York, Inc. (“REBNY”) commenced a hybrid article 78 proceeding and plenary action against the City of New York (“City”)...more

Farrell Fritz, P.C.

Is the Defense of “Release” Documentary Evidence Under 3211(a)(1) or an Affirmative Defense Under (a)(5)(or does it matter)?

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

In Miller v. Brunner, the Appellate Division, Second Department spoke clearly (again) about how to move to dismiss on the defense of release. In a case arising out of the Commercial Division in Kings County (Hon. Sylvia G....more

Latham & Watkins LLP

California Appeals Court: Petitioner Must Show Prejudice for Brown Act Violation

Latham & Watkins LLP on

CEQA Case Report: Understanding the Judicial Landscape for Development - In an unpublished opinion issued January 31, 2018, Citizens for Open & Public Participation v. City of Montebello, Case No. B277060, the California...more

Farrell Fritz, P.C.

The Domain of Interpreting Zoning Ordinance: “Resort” to the Zoning Board of Appeals

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

In opposing Crossroad Ventures, LLC’s (“Crossroad Ventures“) endeavor to construct a vacation resort partially within the Town of Shandaken, (“Town“), grassroots preservation organization Catskill Heritage Alliance, Inc....more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Appellate Court Holds That The New Mexico Unfair Practices Act Applies To A “Services” Contract For The Construction Of A Home,...

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Fogelson v. Bozzone, 2017 N.M. App. LEXIS 58 (July 26, 2017) - In May of 2008, Wallen Development, LLC (“Wallen”) entered into a written agreement to construct and sell a new home to David and Corinne Fogelson...more

9 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide