Stephen C. Robinson

Fortress Bible Church and its pastor sued the Town of Greenburgh and its officials after the town delayed and ultimately denied approvals for the church's proposed building project on its property. The suit alleged violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), First and Fourteenth Amendment rights, state constitutional protections, and New York's SEQRA environmental review statute, claiming the town acted arbitrarily, imposed excessive requirements and fees, and engaged in spoliation of evidence during the review process. Following a 26-day bench trial, the district court issued detailed findings of fact that the town's handling of the application was improper, including unjustified delays, inconsistent demands for stormwater compliance, and lack of credible justification for its actions. The court concluded that these facts supported the plaintiffs' claims of discriminatory treatment in the land-use process.

religious libertycivil rightspropertyprocedure

MetroPCS sued the City of Mount Vernon, alleging that the city violated the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and state and local law by denying its application for a special use permit to install a stealth rooftop antenna, insisting on use of an alternative distributed antenna system, discriminating against it compared to other carriers, and imposing unreasonable application and consulting fees. The city argued that the application was incomplete, failed to show a coverage gap primarily in Mount Vernon, and did not adequately consider less obtrusive alternatives. The court granted summary judgment to MetroPCS, finding that the denial lacked substantial evidence in the record, that the city had unreasonably delayed and discriminated in violation of the TCA, and that the fee provisions were invalid because they lacked limits and were not tied to actual costs; it issued an injunction requiring approval of the application and directed the city to refund excessive fees.

business & regulatoryfederal power

The case concerned a challenge by the United States and an intervenor to the Village of Port Chester's at-large system for electing its six-member Board of Trustees, alleging that the system violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by denying Hispanic residents an equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect candidates of their choice. After a bench trial, the court found that the at-large system resulted in a violation, based on evidence of racially polarized voting, the history of elections, and other Senate factors showing Hispanics had less opportunity to elect representatives despite their population share. In the remedial phase, the court selected the Village's proposed cumulative voting system within the existing at-large framework over a districting plan, determining it was a legally acceptable remedy that addressed the violation. The court ordered the parties to develop an education and outreach program and delayed the 2010 trustee elections until June to allow proper implementation.

electionscivil rights

This case involves security officers suing their employer, the Wackenhut Corporation, under the Fair Labor Standards Act for unpaid wages related to preliminary and postliminary activities such as donning protective gear, obtaining radios and batteries, waiting to enter the gun room, and transit before and after shifts at a nuclear facility. The court granted the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment and dismissed the claims concerning activities performed before the officers obtained their guns and after they returned them. The core reasoning was that these tasks, including donning generic protective equipment and waiting before principal activities began, were not integral to the officers' principal work and thus not compensable under FLSA precedents distinguishing such activities from those that start or end the compensable workday.

labor & employment

The case involved a plaintiff suing Westchester County and several police officers under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, alleging constitutional violations arising from a traffic stop, detention, and search. After partially denying motions to dismiss, the court granted defendant Luciano's motion for reconsideration, finding that he was a deputized federal task force officer with the DEA at the time of the incident and thus a federal employee. The court therefore held that § 1983 claims against him must be construed as Bivens claims and directed the plaintiff to properly serve the United States within 60 days for the official-capacity claims against Luciano.

civil rightsprocedure

In this case, plaintiff Stephen Drago challenged the City of White Plains Planning Board's grant of special permits to MetroPCS for erecting wireless cell antennas, seeking declaratory relief and an injunction under the Federal Telecommunications Act (TCA), 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(v), and the Declaratory Judgment Act. The defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that the plaintiff lacked standing because the TCA does not create a private right of action for individuals adversely affected by local approvals of such facilities. The court granted the motion and dismissed the action, holding that the statute's text and legislative history limit enforcement actions to those consistent with congressional intent to facilitate telecom deployment while constraining local zoning, without extending a private right to residents opposing permits. The court further dismissed the declaratory judgment claim for lack of independent federal jurisdiction once the TCA claim failed.

federal powerbusiness & regulatory

The case involved Sarinsky's Garage Inc. suing Erie Insurance Company for breach of contract under a commercial property liability insurance policy after a 2006 petroleum leak from an underground storage tank, seeking an additional $104,198.44 in remediation costs beyond the $20,000 already paid by the insurer. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment without discovery, and the court granted the defendants' motion while denying the plaintiff's. Applying New York law on insurance contract interpretation, the court held that the policy language was unambiguous in excluding coverage for damage to land and groundwater, with only limited extensions of coverage available that did not reach the full amount claimed.

business & regulatoryproperty

Todd Bohmer, a New York State Trooper, sued the City of New York, the NYPD, the Queens DA, the State of New York, the NYSP, and individual NYSP employees, alleging that an unlawful wiretap of his conversations was conducted and that the resulting evidence was used against him in a non-criminal disciplinary proceeding, in violation of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights along with related conspiracy and state-law claims. The State defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c). The court granted the motion, dismissing all federal claims against the State, the NYSP, and officials in their official capacities on sovereign immunity grounds; dismissing claims against certain individual defendants on absolute immunity grounds because the disciplinary hearing was quasi-judicial; dismissing claims against other individuals for insufficient pleading; and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims.

civil rightscriminal lawprocedure

In this case, Susan Alaimo, Vincent Alaimo, and their daughter Minette sued the Tri-Valley Central School District under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged constitutional violations, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and various New York state laws, stemming from Minette's school attendance ending in 1998. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissing all claims. The court reasoned that the Alaimos failed to exhaust required administrative remedies under the IDEA, presenting no evidence to support their claims of futility or misrepresentation by school officials, and that the remaining claims were time-barred because equitable tolling did not apply despite arguments about Minette's medical condition impairing her ability to testify, as the provided documentation was insufficient to extend the limitations period past the filing deadline.

civil rightsfederal powerprocedure

IBM sued former vice president David Johnson for breach of a non-competition agreement and misappropriation of trade secrets, seeking a preliminary injunction to bar him from working as a senior executive at competitor Dell. The court denied the injunction after a hearing. It found that Johnson had not validly executed the agreement by signing on IBM's signature line, rendering the contract unenforceable under New York law, and that IBM failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on its trade-secret claims or irreparable harm from Johnson's restricted role at Dell.

business & regulatorylabor & employment

In Moore v. Hearle, plaintiff Evan Moore sued police lieutenant Christopher Hearle alleging that officers violated his constitutional rights during a stop and search on September 12, 2003, in New Rochelle, including claims of a public strip search. The court granted in part and denied in part the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The court found that the initial seizure was reasonable based on the circumstances observed by the officer, but determined that factual disputes existed regarding whether a public strip search occurred and its reasonableness, precluding summary judgment on that claim and on qualified immunity. The right to be free from unreasonable public strip searches is clearly established, and material questions of fact remained.

criminal lawcivil rights

In United States v. Groezinger, the defendant was indicted on federal charges of receipt, distribution, and possession of child pornography after a search of his apartment yielded numerous images, emails, and chats involving minors. He filed pretrial motions to suppress physical evidence obtained via a search warrant, his statements to agents during the search, evidence from a hard drive given to a tenant, and to compel certain government disclosures. The court denied all motions, holding that the warrant affidavit established probable cause by linking the defendant's IP address and residence to online chats in which he received and distributed child pornography images, even without detailed descriptions of the images. The court further ruled that the defendant was not in custody when questioned so Miranda warnings were not required, and that the additional evidence was not subject to suppression.

criminal lawprocedure

John Spang sued the Katonah-Lewisboro Union Free School District and its officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law after his termination as Assistant Superintendent for Business, alleging denial of a liberty interest without due process, fraudulent misrepresentation, tortious interference with business relations and pension rights, self-defamation, breach of contract, and First Amendment retaliation. The defendants moved to dismiss four counts, including the two federal claims. The court granted the motion in part and denied it in part, dismissing the Fourteenth Amendment due process claim because Spang, as a probationary employee, lacked a protected property interest and failed to establish a right to a pre- or post-deprivation name-clearing hearing, and dismissing the tortious interference claim on the ground that the superintendent was not a third party to the employment contract; the court denied dismissal of the remaining claims.

civil rightslabor & employmentproceduretorts & liability

In United States v. Kerik, former New York City Corrections and Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik faced a fifteen-count federal indictment charging conspiracy to commit honest services mail and wire fraud, substantive fraud counts, obstruction of tax laws, false statements, and related offenses arising from alleged unreported benefits, false tax filings, and use of public office to benefit a company in exchange for renovations and other payments. Kerik filed pretrial motions to dismiss certain charges for legal insufficiency, to sever counts, and to obtain additional discovery. The court granted the motions in part and denied them in part, finding some allegations sufficient while severing certain counts on venue grounds and addressing joinder and discovery issues based on the indictment's allegations and applicable procedural rules.

criminal lawtaxesprocedure

René Syler sued Lee Woodruff and Random House under the Lanham Act for false designation of origin and registered trademark infringement, claiming their book titled Perfectly Imperfect: A Life in Progress and a related lecture infringed her registered mark PERFECTLY IMPERFECT, which she had used in connection with her own book Good Enough Mother and other lectures and products. Syler sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to stop the defendants from advertising, selling, or promoting the book and lecture. The court denied the requested relief after a hearing and supplemental briefing. The decision rested on Syler’s failure to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, including insufficient evidence that the mark had acquired secondary meaning in the context of literary titles and that consumers would be confused by the defendants’ use.

business & regulatoryprocedure

Plaintiff Joseph Kelly, a former employee of Evolution Markets, Inc., filed suit seeking partial summary judgment declaring that non-compete, non-solicit, and non-recruit provisions in his employment agreement were unenforceable after his termination. Evolution Markets opposed the motion, sought to seal the employment contract, and requested a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to enforce the non-solicitation clause. The court denied Kelly's motion for partial summary judgment, granted the motion to seal, and issued a preliminary injunction barring Kelly from soliciting the company's current or potential clients until May 5, 2009 or final case disposition. The ruling applied New York law on restrictive covenants, concluding that the non-solicitation provision was reasonable in scope and duration and served to protect the employer's legitimate business interests without undue hardship.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involves federal criminal charges against Albert Tranquillo III for mail fraud, conspiracy to commit mail fraud, and bribery arising from an alleged scheme to overbill the City of Mount Vernon for waste removal services under carting contracts by submitting inflated invoices supported by bribes to city officials. Tranquillo filed pre-trial motions seeking a Franks hearing to challenge the search warrant affidavit, suppression of evidence obtained from computers belonging to the carting companies, dismissal of the indictment for alleged government misconduct, a bill of particulars, and additional discovery. The court denied all motions in full, concluding that Tranquillo lacked Fourth Amendment standing to contest the search because he failed to establish any reasonable expectation of privacy in the corporate computers and that the remaining requests lacked sufficient factual or legal support.

criminal lawprocedure

Bonnie Vent, a California entertainment broker, sued Mars Snackfood US and Mars, Inc. in federal court under diversity jurisdiction, alleging misappropriation of her idea for a Halloween cross-promotion using animated M&M's characters with Addams Family characters after she pitched it by phone and Mars later ran similar ads. Vent withdrew her implied-contract claim, leaving only the misappropriation claim under New Jersey law. The court granted Mars's motion to dismiss, holding that the amended complaint failed to plausibly allege the idea's novelty—since Mars had previously run comparable cross-promotions, such as with Shrek—or that it was shared in confidence, as no fiduciary relationship or confidentiality agreement arose from the arm's-length call.

business & regulatorytorts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved Richard Genin, who was indicted on one count of possessing child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B) after FBI agents executed a search warrant at his apartment and recovered videos, receipts, and a WebTV console, along with statements he made during an interview admitting purchases from various websites. Genin filed pretrial motions to suppress the physical evidence and his statements, to require a bill of particulars, and to obtain Brady material and Rule 16 discovery. The court denied all motions in their entirety, finding the search warrant affidavit established probable cause despite generalized descriptions of the videos and that the statements were voluntary.

criminal lawprocedure

Joe F. Brown, an African-American employee at Orange & Rockland Utilities, sued the company under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and the New York State Human Rights Law, alleging a hostile work environment and constructive discharge based on race, citing incidents including coworker rumors of theft, nooses in the workplace, phone calls, and shunning. The court granted in part and denied in part the employer's motion for summary judgment. It granted summary judgment on the constructive discharge claim because Brown did not show that the employer's response to the alleged harassment was deliberate rather than merely negligent or ineffective. It denied summary judgment on the hostile work environment claim, finding sufficient evidence that some of the conduct was related to race.

civil rightslabor & employment