The Belmont Arena: Shovels and Lawsuits, a Long Island Tale

[Bones45]

New York Islanders: Belmont Arena Lawsuit Could Have Legs

by Michel Anderson

After the second lawsuit was field I asked Ashira Ostrow, Professor of Real Estate and Land Use Law at Hofstra University if it had any legs. The only thing that was known at that point was the lawsuit was filed by Elmont civic leaders and was arguing that Belmont was a parkland that had served as a disaster evacuation site.

But, after speaking with Professor Ostrow, that might not necessarily be the crux of the group’s argument. The group is claiming that the land can’t just be sold without the consent of the State Legislature based on Public Trust Doctrine.

New York State Franchise Oversight cannot usurp the Elective Official Authority to transfer or lease public park/state land without a legislative act. -Halop et al v. Empire State Development Corp. et al. pg.13...

​

So why does that argument have legs? Well, it’s been used before, quite recently and it won. The same argument was used against the construction of a mall at Willets Point and it won...

I really want you to lose your ability to bold.

 

[Lame Lambert]

I really want you to lose your ability to bold.

Or post in this thread, but bold is a good first step.

 

[MJF]

New York Islanders: Belmont Arena Lawsuit Could Have Legs

by Michel Anderson

After the second lawsuit was field I asked Ashira Ostrow, Professor of Real Estate and Land Use Law at Hofstra University if it had any legs. The only thing that was known at that point was the lawsuit was filed by Elmont civic leaders and was arguing that Belmont was a parkland that had served as a disaster evacuation site.

But, after speaking with Professor Ostrow, that might not necessarily be the crux of the group’s argument. The group is claiming that the land can’t just be sold without the consent of the State Legislature based on Public Trust Doctrine.

New York State Franchise Oversight cannot usurp the Elective Official Authority to transfer or lease public park/state land without a legislative act. -Halop et al v. Empire State Development Corp. et al. pg.13...

​

So why does that argument have legs? Well, it’s been used before, quite recently and it won. The same argument was used against the construction of a mall at Willets Point and it won...

Belmont Park IS NOT PARKLAND. It NEVER WAS PARKLAND. It was privately held land that had a race track on it and was deeded to the state 100 years ago.

This article is trash.

 

[IslesCLT]

Belmont Park IS NOT PARKLAND. It NEVER WAS PARKLAND. It was privately held land that had a race track on it and was deeded to the state 100 years ago.

This article is trash.

But, your honor, it has park right there in it's name!

 

[Costigan77]

New York Islanders: Belmont Arena Lawsuit Could Have Legs

by Michel Anderson

After the second lawsuit was field I asked Ashira Ostrow, Professor of Real Estate and Land Use Law at Hofstra University if it had any legs. The only thing that was known at that point was the lawsuit was filed by Elmont civic leaders and was arguing that Belmont was a parkland that had served as a disaster evacuation site.

But, after speaking with Professor Ostrow, that might not necessarily be the crux of the group’s argument. The group is claiming that the land can’t just be sold without the consent of the State Legislature based on Public Trust Doctrine.

New York State Franchise Oversight cannot usurp the Elective Official Authority to transfer or lease public park/state land without a legislative act. -Halop et al v. Empire State Development Corp. et al. pg.13...

​

So why does that argument have legs? Well, it’s been used before, quite recently and it won. The same argument was used against the construction of a mall at Willets Point and it won...

Jesus christ.


I'm so happy to hear the opinion of a professor at hofstra of real estate and land use law. Please let me know if Phil Dunphy has an opinion.

State owned land. Ashira is not versed on the issue.


Please stop posting BS[


If the author could spell, or had proper grammar, would probably have an open mind.

The lawsuit was FILED.....not FIELDED

/QUOTE]

 

[MJF]

New York Islanders: Belmont Arena Lawsuit Could Have Legs

by Michel Anderson

After the second lawsuit was field I asked Ashira Ostrow, Professor of Real Estate and Land Use Law at Hofstra University if it had any legs. The only thing that was known at that point was the lawsuit was filed by Elmont civic leaders and was arguing that Belmont was a parkland that had served as a disaster evacuation site.

But, after speaking with Professor Ostrow, that might not necessarily be the crux of the group’s argument. The group is claiming that the land can’t just be sold without the consent of the State Legislature based on Public Trust Doctrine.

New York State Franchise Oversight cannot usurp the Elective Official Authority to transfer or lease public park/state land without a legislative act. -Halop et al v. Empire State Development Corp. et al. pg.13...

​

So why does that argument have legs? Well, it’s been used before, quite recently and it won. The same argument was used against the construction of a mall at Willets Point and it won...

And for clarity, it is the Citi Field parking lot that's parkland as part of Flushing Meadows Park, not the Willets Point site across the street. Those parcels are being developed. One day. Maybe.

 

[MJF]

But, your honor, it has park right there in it's name!

 

[Costigan77]

dupe

 

[MJF]

Jesus christ.


I'm so happy to hear the opinion of a professor at hofstra of real estate and land use law. Please let me know if Phil Dunphy has an opinion.

State owned land. Ashira is not versed on the issue.


Please stop posting BS

Who is this prof? Professor Quackenbush?

If the writer of this piece didn't just make an ass of himself I don't know what else to say.

 

[Mr Misunderstood]

He used "legs" 6 times. So close to the full Octopus.

 

[Lame Lambert]

He used "legs" 6 times. So close to the full Octopus.

Still enough legs for Squidward!

 

[MJF]

He used "legs" 6 times. So close to the full Octopus.

That's awesome.

 

[MJF]

Still enough legs for Squidward!

Now I'm in the mood for some calamari.

 

[Steve55]

I really want you to lose your ability to bold.

Not gonna happen.

Or post in this thread, but bold is a good first step.

And for clarity, it is the Citi Field parking lot that's parkland as part of Flushing Meadows Park, not the Willets Point site across the street. Those parcels are being developed. One day. Maybe.

Thanks for clarification.

He used "legs" 6 times. So close to the full Octopus.

 

[Steve55]

Jesus christ.


I'm so happy to hear the opinion of a professor at hofstra of real estate and land use law. Please let me know if Phil Dunphy has an opinion.

State owned land. Ashira is not versed on the issue.


Please stop posting BS[


If the author could spell, or had proper grammar, would probably have an open mind.

The lawsuit was FILED.....not FIELDED

/QUOTE]

Only the judge presiding the Elmont case can decide if it's BS. But I agree with you on the author having spelling problems.

 

[Rengi]

Now I'm in the mood for some calamari.

Buon appetite! I ordered now also Calamari at my favorite Italian, no it's not Dal Colle :-D

 

[Mr Misunderstood]

Buon appetite! I ordered now also Calamari at my favorite Italian, no it's not Dal Colle :-D

Is it Lamoriello?

 

[Rengi]

Is it Lamoriello?

Hahaha .. not yet, it still is Don Miguel Corleone! LoL

 

[Drive 4 Five]

Based on the court documents filed, it appears the lawyer for the Elmont group is a small family practice operating out of a residential house in Elmont. Looks like Elmont Civic group is on a small budget, found a local lawyer, and are just recyclying the Willets Point case arguments, even though the facts differ from this situation, in a hail-mary attempt to gain some traction with the court. They are going up against environmental law specialists from two top-tier international law firms representing Franchise Oversight and NYAP. The Elmont suit has ZERO chance of going anywhere. The Floral Park suit may get some traction, based on deeper pockets, but ultimately I expect that to be thrown out too.

Construction would not have started if the main parties involved (Cuomo, Islanders etc..) felt there was any doubt about the project moving forward.

 

[Big L]

Based on the court documents filed, it appears the lawyer for the Elmont group is a small family practice operating out of a residential house in Elmont. Looks like Elmont Civic group is on a small budget, found a local lawyer, and are just recyclying the Willets Point case arguments, even though the facts differ from this situation, in a hail-mary attempt to gain some traction with the court. They are going up against environmental law specialists from two top-tier international law firms representing Franchise Oversight and NYAP. The Elmont suit has ZERO chance of going anywhere. The Floral Park suit may get some traction, based on deeper pockets, but ultimately I expect that to be thrown out too.

Construction would not have started if the main parties involved (Cuomo, Islanders etc..) felt there was any doubt about the project moving forward.

I’m no lawyer, and that sounded pretty lawerly. I’ll allow it.

 

[doublechili]

But, your honor, it has park right there in it's name!

 

[doublechili]

it appears the lawyer for the Elmont group is a small family practice operating out of a residential house in Elmont. Looks like Elmont Civic group is on a small budget, found a local lawyer, and are just recyclying the Willets Point case arguments, even though the facts differ from this situation, in a hail-mary attempt to gain some traction with the court.

Seriously? That's pretty funny. It just reinforces my belief that this lawsuit is less about actually winning the case and stopping the project and more about the local politicos/activists trying to gain some PR and score points with their constituencies. All that needs to happen is to throw them some crumb, a minor concession on some point, right about when they're running out of money. They'll be able to claim a "victory" and will go away. Meanwhile, more concrete will be poured tomorrow....

 

[periferal]

Based on the court documents filed, it appears the lawyer for the Elmont group is a small family practice operating out of a residential house in Elmont. Looks like Elmont Civic group is on a small budget, found a local lawyer, and are just recyclying the Willets Point case arguments, even though the facts differ from this situation, in a hail-mary attempt to gain some traction with the court. They are going up against environmental law specialists from two top-tier international law firms representing Franchise Oversight and NYAP. The Elmont suit has ZERO chance of going anywhere. The Floral Park suit may get some traction, based on deeper pockets, but ultimately I expect that to be thrown out too.

Construction would not have started if the main parties involved (Cuomo, Islanders etc..) felt there was any doubt about the project moving forward.

I don't know who you are, but I nominate you to be the point person for all Belmont legal matters from this point on.

 

[periferal]

Seriously? That's pretty funny. It just reinforces my belief that this lawsuit is less about actually winning the case and stopping the project and more about the local politicos/activists trying to gain some PR and score points with their constituencies. All that needs to happen is to throw them some crumb, a minor concession on some point, right about when they're running out of money. They'll be able to claim a "victory" and will go away. Meanwhile, more concrete will be poured tomorrow....

Would be unbelievably awesome if they took all the dirt they're excavating and dumped it on the house on anyone against this project. Kind of like the dirt version of this...

 

[The Lighthouse]

Hah, pretty amusing to see a familiar name appear in this conversation. Professor Ostrow writes pretty extensively on land use legal issues - google her name and you'll find she's gained some recognition from law reviews that have published her articles. She knows what she's talking about.

Having said that, I'm somewhat more amused that we're now taking our legal news from an Islanders blog. I'm sure Professor Ostrow answered a question or two for the story, and probably mentioned the Willets Point case as an example, but notably missing is any mention of her opinion regarding whether the legal theory she mentioned could actually succeed. That's because she probably wouldn't opine too strongly on that.