Practices
Litigation
Real Estate and Land Use Litigation

Real Estate and Land Use Litigation

Our experience in real estate and land use litigation encompasses eminent domain, inverse condemnation, exactions and other constitutional property rights claims, affordable housing, fair housing, drafting and enforcement of regulations, historic preservation, mineral rights and earth materials, specific performance, landlord and tenant, common interest ownership communities, quiet title, tax appeals, and foreclosures.

We represent clients before state and local agencies in administrative proceedings, and in civil actions in the state and federal trial and appellate courts, involving permitting, injunctions, compensation and damages, and enforcement. We represent businesses, associations, individuals, non-profits and government agencies in these matters.

Our Land Use and Zoning legal team is consistently ranked nationally among U.S. New and World Report and Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms.” Additionally, the land use and zoning litigation team has been ranked Tier 1 regionally as a “Best Law Firm.” The rankings are based on positive ratings by clients and peers, and reflect the quality and breadth of experience as well as the legal abilities, professionalism and integrity displayed on behalf of clients by the real estate and land use litigators at Shipman.

Experience

Land use

Won Temporary Injunction Prohibiting Truck Ban Ordinance for Egg Distributor

Mitlitsky Eggs, LLC

Obtained a temporary injunction in Willimantic Superior Court barring the Town of Windham, Connecticut from adopting a “no through truck” ordinance that would have substantially damaged Mitlitsky Eggs, LLC’s distribution business located in the adjoining Town of Lebanon. Previously drafted an opinion letter that convinced the Lebanon Planning and Zoning Commission to grant a special permit allowing the company to modernize its operations with a new refrigerated warehouse on the grounds that the business qualified as an “agricultural” use.

Land use approvals and litigation

Secured Approvals and Purchase of Commercial Property for Multifamily Redevelopment Project

32-36 Iron Horse LLC

Represented developer in the purchase of a construction company’s storage yard for use in a planned residential redevelopment a block from the main commercial artery through Simsbury, CT. The project is a 175-unit multifamily development with 10 percent of the units designated for affordable rents, with walking trails connecting to the Rails to Trails Greenway path on town-owned land. The firm provided end-to-end support on the transaction beginning with the execution of a purchase contract, followed by oversight of environmental investigation and remediation work and a Transfer Act evaluation. The team also helped obtain a wetlands permit and zoning special exception for the new development from town land use boards. The culmination of the matter resulted in the successful closing of the contract.

Zoning Approval for New STEM Building for University of New Haven

University of New Haven

Led a team that in September 2017 obtained special permit and site plan approvals from the West Haven Planning and Zoning Commission to allow the University of New Haven to construct a new Center for Science, Technology and Innovation on its main campus.

Defeated Conflict of Interest Claim Brought Against Inland Wetlands Commissioner

Town of Colchester, Connecticut

Defeated a claim that a member of the Town of Colchester, Connecticut’s inland wetlands agency acted with a conflict of interest when voting to approve a shopping center in close proximity to property owned by the commissioner. After holding an evidentiary hearing, the New London Superior Court found that the plaintiffs could show no personal or financial benefit to the commission member and that the plaintiffs had waived the claim by not raising it before the commission. Also successfully defended the substance of the wetlands commission's decision on the merits of the appeal. Fedus v. Colchester Conservation Commission, 2003 WL 21235404 (May 15, 2003); 2004 WL 423150 (Jan. 28, 2004).

Defense of Demolition Code Appeal and Negligence Lawsuits Related to Urban Fire

City of New Haven

In December 2007, a major fire in downtown New Haven caused the City’s Building Official to order the demolition of several buildings. The property owner appealed the demolition order and filed a negligence lawsuit seeking monetary damages from the City and several of its officials as well as the contractors and consultants involved with the demolition and disposal project. Mr. Williams is currently defending those cases along with another negligence action brought by a retail business adjacent to the fire-damaged buildings.

Load More +

Real estate

Pre-Trial Victory in Adverse Possession Case

The Groton Long Point Association, Inc.

The firm represented the Groton Long Point Association, Inc. (“GLPA”) in an adverse possession lawsuit brought by a group of owners of abutting properties on Groton Long Point. The litigation focused on certain narrow rights of way between the abutting properties that the plaintiffs claimed title to by virtue of adverse possession and as easements of necessity. GLPA had taken action over the years to maintain the rights of way and assert ownership over them for the enjoyment of all GLPA members.

Both sides filed pre-trial motions for summary judgment, asking the court to decide the case in their favor based on evidence obtained through pre-trial discovery, without conducting a full trial. The firm argued that GLPA was entitled to immunity from the plaintiffs’ claims because of its quasi-municipal status, and that the plaintiffs could not prove their adverse possession and other claims.

Joe Williams and Sarah Dlugoszewski of the firm’s Litigation Department presented the motion before Judge Steven Jacobs in New London Superior Court. Judge Jacobs returned a decision in GLPA’s favor on the ground that plaintiffs could not meet their burden to show that they adversely possessed the rights of way. In granting GLPA’s motion for summary judgment and denying the plaintiffs’ motion, the court entered a final judgment concluding the lawsuit in favor of GLPA without need of a trial. Read the full decision here.