Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Village of Sackets Harbor

Village of Sackets Harbor

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,455|Likes:
Published by Newzjunky

More info:

Published by: Newzjunky on Jun 14, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/14/2012

pdf

text

original

 
One Lincoln Center
I
Syracuse, NY 13202-1355
1
bsk.com
JONATHAN B. FELLOWS, ESQ.
jfellows@bsk.com
P: 315-218-8120F: 315-218-8100
June 13, 2012
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Eric Constance, Mayor
Village of Sackets Harbor
112 North Broad Street
P0 Box 335Sackets Harbor, New York 13685
Re:
Sackets Harbor Leasing Company, LLC v. The Village of Sackets Harbor, et al.
Dear Mayor Constance:
I am pleased to report that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed thedismissal of Mr. Maxon’s federal court lawsuit against the Village. A copy of the
summary order is attached.Very truly yours,
BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC
i
Jonathan B. Fellows
JBF/jchEnclosure
cc:
ennis Wheipley, Esq. (with copy of enclosure, via Electronic Mail)
2007102.1 6/13/2012A Professional Limited Liability Company
 
Case: 11-901 Document: 1504 Page: 1
6/13/2012
35296
 
11-90 1 -ev
Sackets Harbor Leasing Co. v. Village of Sackets Harbor
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
SUMMARY ORDER
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT.
CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS
PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN
A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE
FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION
"SUMMARY
ORDER").
A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY
OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held atthe Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of NewYork, on the 13
t
’ day of June, two thousand twelve.
PRESENT: JON 0. NEWMAN,
RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR.,CHRISTOPHER F. DRONEY,
Circuit Judges.
SACKETS HARBOR LEASING COMPANY, LLC,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1314
15
16
17
1819
20
21
22
23
24
25
2627
No. 11-901-cv
THE VILLAGE OF SACKETS HARBOR,MICHAEL R. KINNIE, IN HIS CAPACITY AS MAYOROF THE VILLAGE OF SACKETS HARBOR,ERIC CONSTANCE, IN HIS CAPACITY AS DEPUTYMAYOR OF THE VILLAGE OF SACKETS HARBOR,LAWRENCE C. BARONE, IN HIS CAPACITY ASMEMBER OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THEVILLAGE OF SACKETS HARBOR,DANIEL FRECHETTE, IN HIS CAPACITY AS MEMBER
 
Case: 11-901 Document: 150-1 Page: 2
6113/2012
35296
 
OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF
SACKETS HARBOR,
GENIE MCKAY, IN HIS/HER CAPACITY AS MEMBEROF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF
SACKETS HARBOR,
LONNIE REINHARDT, IN HIS CAPACITY ASDEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
SUPERINTENDENT,
Defendants-Appellees. *
FOR APPELLANT:
LAN ROBERT PETERMAN, Hiscock & Barclay, LLP,
Syracuse, NY.
FOR APPELLEES:
ONATHAN B. FELLOWS, Bond, Schoeneck & King,
PLLC, Syracuse, NY.Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District
of New York (Neal P. McCurn,
Judge).
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED,
AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.
Sackets Harbor Leasing Company ("SHLC") sued the defendants, the Village of
Sackets Harbor (the "Village") and several Village officials, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, claiming that the defendants had violated its right to due process by interfering with
its wharf right along the eastern boundary of its waterfront property. SHLC appeals from
a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York
(McCurn,
L)
granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the ground thatSHLC’s claims were precluded by a prior lawsuit in New York state court. We assumethe parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and record of prior proceedings, which
we reference only as necessary to explain our decision to affirm.
* The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the official caption as shown above.
2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
910
11
1213
14
1516
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26272829
30
31
32
33
34

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->