Federal Court Rejects Civil Rights Claims in Real Estate Development Dispute
Attorneys Casey L. McCaffrey and Gerard T. Donnelly successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of a municipality and its officials in a lawsuit brought before the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The plaintiffs asserted claims against the municipality for alleged violations of their constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in connection with the municipality’s actions in allegedly delaying two of the plaintiffs’ real estate development projects.
The plaintiffs—a developer, its affiliated entity, and the manager of both—filed three separate claims for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the municipality, its Board of Selectmen, its Earth Removal Board, and the Town Health Agent. The plaintiffs generally alleged that the municipality unreasonably delayed permits for their projects in a purposeful effort to thwart their developments; charged arbitrary and unlawful gravel removal fees that were double what they charged others; and unlawfully attempted to extort a large payment from them in enforcement of a purportedly illegal bylaw. The plaintiffs claimed these actions constituted violations of their substantive due process rights.
Attorneys McCaffrey and Donnelly argued that the allegations supporting plaintiffs’ constitutional claims—while disputed—failed to rise to the level of egregious conduct required to state a claim for substantive due process violations. They emphasized that the plaintiffs ultimately received the permits and approvals sought, and that the plaintiffs’ allegations of unfair treatment and delay were no more than typical disputes between municipalities and real estate developers. The court agreed and held that none of the plaintiffs’ allegations, even when taken as true, rose to the level of a constitutional violation. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on all of the plaintiffs’ civil rights claims.
Up Next...
