An eminent domain case involving the expansion of Columbia University could mean the end to four Tuck-It-Away self storage locations unless the U.S. Supreme Court steps in and rules against the prestigious school.
The Supreme Court will convene Dec. 10, 2010 to re-evaluate the legal aspects of eminent domain in relation to the Manhattan-based 17-acre campus expansion. First the court has to agree to hear the case. If it refuses to hear the case, the state will automatically be able to seize all of the private properties involved so that the university may expand its research facilities. The odds are stacked against the affected businesses since the court has a history of granting a mere one percent of cases for debate.
“The significance is huge,” Norman Siegel, who is Sprayregen’s attorney and the former director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said on Thursday. “If they decide to hear our case, then the issue will be front and center before the Supreme Court of the United States.”
The businesses in jeopardy within the expansion zone (from 125th to 134th streets) are: the storage businesses owned by Nick Sprayregen; and two gas stations owned by Gurnam Singh and Parminder Kaur. Eminent domain laws require the state to compensate Sprayregen, Singh and Kaur the market-value of their properties.
Sprayregen is a major player in the fight against the university. The case is officially registered as Tuck-It-Away vs. New York State Urban Development Corp. Sprayregen’s properties is considered the most coveted. The Institute for Justice has filed an amicus on his behalf. An amicus is a party not involved with the litigation but is allowed by the court to advise a legal party.
Unfortunately for Sprayregen, lower courts have sided with Columbia and deemed the land being fought for as blighted. But Sprayregen has countered that claim by noting that the land surrounding the properties is owned by Columbia, which has left it vacant and allowed it to become run down.
In a press release, Sprayregen was reported as saying, “The surrounding vacant properties — most of which Columbia owns — have been allowed to deteriorate, and without any recognition of the hypocrisy involved, the state now points to those properties as justifying the declaration of our neighborhood and my business as ‘blighted’ so it may hand all of this land over to Columbia University.”
Sprayregen is also fighting on the state of principle, insinuating Columbia is using its power and money to position itself as the likely winner.
“It is a tremendous feeling of violation, it really is,” Sprayregen said. “You’re being violated by the very government that’s supposed to protect your rights but instead is merely doing the bidding of the highest bidder, so to speak.”
Sources Used:
Astor, Maggie. “U.S. Supreme Court to Consider Hearing M’Ville Case.” Columbia Spectator. Dec. 10, 2010.
Mitchell, Thomas. “High Court Has a Chance to Revisit and Clarify Kelo.” Las Vegan Review-Journal. Dec. 9, 2010.