In S* v de Blasio, the Appellate Division, First Department, addressed long-running litigation surrounding a developer’s failed attempt to convert a five-story Manhattan property into a dormitory. Plaintiffs, led by GS, alleged that various city officials, organizations, and individuals unlawfully interfered with their project, ultimately leading to a terminated lease and loan default. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of their claims, citing immunity and legal deficiencies.
A central issue was the denial of S’s building permit, which the plaintiffs claimed was influenced by political corruption and improper influence. The court found these allegations speculative and lacking in specificity, reaffirming that government officials and agencies have immunity when engaging in discretionary administrative acts, such as permit approvals. Plaintiffs had previously raised similar claims, which were dismissed in a prior appeal.
The court also upheld the application of the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, which protects lobbying efforts from liability unless they involve sham or corrupt practices. Plaintiffs argued that defendants had acted improperly, but the court found these assertions insufficient to bypass legal protections.
Furthermore, plaintiffs sought to introduce new claims in a second amended complaint, including nuisance and violations under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). However, the court determined that these claims suffered from the same deficiencies as the original lawsuit—namely, reliance on speculative allegations and failure to establish actionable wrongdoing.
Think they should have slept on those claims?
# # #
DECISION