The case involved a church that sued the Village of Canisteo under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) after local zoning boards denied its requests to rezone or grant a variance for building a new church facility in a light industrial district where such uses were prohibited. The church argued that the denial substantially burdened its religious exercise by preventing expansion due to inadequate current facilities. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), holding that the complaint failed to plausibly allege a substantial burden because the church had not purchased the property, was aware of the zoning restrictions from the outset, had other available sites in the village, and created its own hardship by pursuing a non-permitted location. The decision noted that RLUIPA did not override the zoning code in this context and that the church declined an opportunity to amend its complaint to allege unique suitability of the site.
This diversity case arose from a franchise agreement between FLB, LLC and @Wireless Enterprises, Inc. for operating a retail cellular services shop, with claims of breach of contract and related state-law torts against individual defendant Craig Jerabeck and successor entity 5Linx. The court granted summary judgment to both defendants, denied plaintiffs' motion to strike an affidavit, granted Jerabeck's Rule 11 motion, and dismissed the action. It found no basis for personal liability against Jerabeck, who was not a party to the agreement, and no viable claims against 5Linx, while determining that plaintiffs' pursuit of unsupported claims violated Rule 11 and warranted an admonition to counsel. The underlying facts involved @Wireless's breaches of its separate agreement with Verizon Wireless and the franchise agreement's terms regarding independent contractor status and approved suppliers.
This case involved a dispute over a commercial property in Rochester, New York, that Ridge Seneca Plaza, LLC purchased from First Allied Shopping Center, L.P. in 2001 under a contract specifying an 'as is, where is and with all faults' sale with explicit waivers of claims related to the property's environmental or physical condition. Ridge Seneca later brought claims against First Allied for mutual mistake, negligence, equitable indemnification, and restitution, alleging issues with undisclosed environmental contamination. The court granted First Allied's motion for summary judgment and dismissed those causes of action. The core reasoning was that the purchase agreement contained no representations about the premises' condition, placed the burden of inspection on the buyer, and included broad release provisions that barred post-sale claims regardless of any alleged mistake by the seller.
The case concerned a plaintiff who alleged she was sexually abused and raped by a treatment counselor while serving probation sentences for DWI convictions that required court-ordered alcohol counseling and Treatment Court participation. She brought state-law tort claims for negligent hiring, training, and supervision as well as constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Livingston County and related entities, asserting they failed to protect her despite prior complaints about the counselor. The court granted the defendants' motions to dismiss and for judgment on the pleadings, holding that the counselor was employed by a nonprofit or by the state Office of Court Administration rather than the County during the relevant periods, that the complaint failed to allege any County policy or custom or obvious need for supervision that would support municipal liability under § 1983, and that the tort claims likewise lacked a basis for County responsibility. The plaintiff's cross-motion for attorney's fees was denied.
In this bankruptcy appeal, debtors Keith and Marylou Morgan challenged a bankruptcy court ruling that monthly annuity payments Mrs. Morgan received from a 1981 medical malpractice settlement were not exempt from their Chapter 7 estate. The district court reversed, holding that the payments qualified for exemption under New York Debtor and Creditor Law § 282 and Insurance Law § 3212(d)(1), which protect annuity benefits and proceeds due to the annuitant. The court relied on Second Circuit precedent in In re Baker, which confirmed that a debtor who settled a personal-injury claim is treated as having paid the consideration for the annuity even if the insurer owns the contract, and that exemption statutes are to be liberally construed in the debtor’s favor. The matter was remanded for the bankruptcy court to decide, under § 3212(d)(2), whether any portion of the payments should be directed to creditors.
This case involved a federal civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 brought by the father of Rosemary Infante, who died from a prescription drug overdose in 2006. The plaintiff alleged that Monroe County medical examiners violated his daughter's constitutional rights by classifying her death as a suicide without adequately investigating her medical history or considering evidence suggesting an accidental overdose. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. It reasoned that a deceased person has no constitutional rights that can be violated by post-death actions such as an autopsy or manner-of-death determination, and therefore no viable Section 1983 claim existed. The court expressed no view on the actual cause of death.