Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
New York Impact Fees: Unconstitutional?
A developer challenging two fees imposed by a town as part of the price of obtaining subdivision approval claimed in its suit that the Town of Monroe's Local Law 3 was unconstitutional. The developer's claim was rejected by the Second Department in Twin Lakes Development Corp. v. Town of Monroe (see page 3). Although the court's conclusion was not surprising in light of past judicial treatment of impact fees, the case presents the opportunity for a reconsideration of New York's treatment of such fees.
The Twin Lakes Case
The Twin Lakes Development Corp., which sought to subdivide a parcel into 22 residential lots in Monroe, challenged the town's Local Law 3, which required a subdivision applicant to pay a fee of $1500 per lot in lieu of a dedication of parkland on its property. (The developer also challenged a second local law which required a subdivision applicant to pay consultant fees incurred by the town Planning Board in reviewing the subdivision application; this article does not directly address that fee). The developer contended that Local Law 3 was unconstitutional. In addition, Local Law 3 raised significant statutory issues.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?