Town moorings prompt $36M in lawsuits
By Beth Rosenberg / Staff Writer
b.rosenberg@tradeonlytoday.com
A New York boatyard owner has filed
a $19 million lawsuit against a Long Island town, some of its officials and a
competitor for allegedly failing to recognize his winning bid for the town’s
mooring and tender service.
Seymour’s Boatyard filed its suit in
August in U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of New York. It names
the town of Huntington, seven officials
and Coneys Marine Corp. as defendants. The defendants filed a motion to
dismiss in October.
The suit comes on the heels of a $17
million suit the boatyard filed in March, in
the same court, against the neighboring
village of Lloyd Harbor, 10 of its officials
and Coneys. In that suit, Seymour’s makes
similar charges against the village, alleging
its officials “arbitrarily” revoked the permission Seymour’s had been granted to
run its mooring and tender service.
In the most recently filed suit, Seymour’s said in court documents that in
November 2007 the town of Huntington solicited bids to operate about 30
moorings at Gold Star Beach within
Huntington Harbor.
In February, Seymour’s was notified it
had submitted the winning bid for the
exclusive license to operate the service, and it entered into a contract with
the town. Previously, the service had
been provided by Coneys.
In court documents, Seymour’s said
defendant Matthew E. Coneys is “
politically connected” and is a member of
the town’s Harbors and Boating Advisory Council.
Conspiracy claim
Seymour’s contends that upon learning
it was about to lose the concession,
Coneys “conspired with the other defendants to cause the town to take the contract back and give the benefits of the
contract back to Coneys Marine Corp.”
Seymour’s also says Coneys placed its
moorings within all of the space available within town waters, though it did
not have the proper permits, and the
town did nothing to stop it.
“The defendants caused the town to
revoke its acceptance of the plaintiff’s
winning bid, to unilaterally repudiate
the contract which had been awarded
to Seymour’s, and to thereafter permit
Coneys Marine Corp. to maintain all of
the moorings, which defendant Coneys
had placed into town waters illegally,”
according to court papers.
Seymour’s claims it has lost substantial amounts of money as a result. It is
seeking $4 million in compensatory
damages and $15 million in punitive
damages.
When granted a license to place and
maintain moorings in Huntington Harbor, and to operate a marine tender service from Huntington’s town dock, a
business can charge substantial fees for
the service, not only on the Huntington
side of Puppy’s Cove, but also on the
Lloyd Harbor side, which accommodates an additional 300 moorings, according to court documents.
Matthew Coneys had no comment on
the lawsuit. In a motion to dismiss the
case, filed by his lawyers in October,
Coneys denied the claims saying it was
not awarded the contract and “a conspiracy theory is not viable.”
Huntington town attorney John J. Leo
concedes Seymour’s did win the bid, but
“the boating community and citizens
would be charged more because both
Seymour’s and Coneys could not come
to an agreement about where moorings
were and where they weren’t.”
Because of this, Leo says, the town
took over the service itself.
“We tried to broker an agreement
where they both could coexist and
both thrive,” Leo says. But, he maintains, “we told them from the beginning
if they don’t come to an agreement, the
town of Huntington would take over
the launch service and operate it itself,
and that’s exactly what we did.”
A pre-motion conference was held
Oct. 24 on the motion to dismiss. Oral
argument was set for Feb. 13, 2009.
Lloyd Harbor suit
In the suit filed in March against the
village of Lloyd Harbor, its officials and
Coneys, Seymour’s claims the village
never implemented a formal process by
which anyone could apply for a mooring permit, and Coney’s has held the
permit for approximately 200 moorings
for the last 13 years.
Matthew Coneys, court papers say, is
a member of the village’s Harbor Control Commission.
Once Seymour’s received its permit
from the neighboring town of Huntington, it requested a mooring permit
from Lloyd Harbor and subsequently received the exclusive mooring permit.
Court papers claim Matthew Coneys
“conspired with the other defendants
... behind closed doors, to deprive the
plaintiff of such mooring permits as
well as the opportunity to apply for
such permit.”
Seymour’s permission to run the service
was then revoked, court documents say.
In this case, Seymour’s is seeking $2
million in compensatory damages and
$15 million in punitive damages.
Village clerk Eileen Schulz says the
village had “no comment” on the litigation. n
