Legal Ruling Favorable for EIC
- February 27: EIC files Edgemont incorporation petition with the Town of Greenburgh.
- May 5: Town Supervisor Paul Feiner denies said petition.
- June 7: EIC files Article 78 lawsuit challenging Feiner’s denial.
- July 21: Feiner, using taxpayer funds, defends his decision with a motion to dismiss EIC’s Article 78. The objectors to the petition join in that motion.
Susan Cacace, Acting Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Westchester County, denied Mr. Feiner's motion to dismiss (#4 above). The basis of her ruling is that the allegations in EIC’s petition that Mr. Feiner violated Article 2 of the Village Law: “raise a cognizable cause of action…which is not conclusively refuted by any proffered documentary evidence.”
The Court gave the Mr. Feiner and the rest of the objectors 20 days to answer EIC’s lawsuit and show cause why the court should not vacate Mr. Feiner’s refusal to certify Edgemont’s incorporation petition and order the Town to schedule an Edgemont-wide referendum on the issue.
For example, Mr. Feiner might justify how he counted 1,240 more residents eligible to vote in Greenville than we counted -- a 26% variance. Did he include deceased voters? Voters who moved away? Voters who are in the election district but outside the Greenville Fire District?
Or he could explain how the petition’s metes and bounds for the proposed village, which have functioned without change as the exact same territorial description of our active fire district for 95 years, were insufficient to also serve as the boundaries of the proposed village.
We look forward to reading Mr. Feiner’s arguments, if any.
Should Mr. Feiner and the objectors have anything new to add, our lawyers will have the opportunity and are prepared to respond shortly thereafter, if necessary. The Judge will then rule on the petition with that complete record.
Justice Cacace is the same judge assigned to decide the second Article 78 over the EIC's petition. The second lawsuit against Mr. Feiner has been brought by his former campaign manager and objector to the petition who also runs the anti-incorporation website.
The lawyer he’s using is one that the Town frequently hires with our tax dollars.
That bizarre case is one where both sides seek to have the EIC's petition denied and neither want the EIC, who are necessary parties to that proceeding, participating. The EIC has moved to intervene in that collusive lawsuit and seek its dismissal.
Justice Cacace is also presiding over the Sprainbrook Nursery/Shelbourne matter.