Judge Grasso Denies Temporary Halt On Cell Tower – No Proof Of Irreparable Harm

cell tower presidentialLarry Loigman Esq. tells TLS today that the Judge has rejected a temportary halt on the controversial Cell Tower placed near Presidential Estates, because the tower – which is already in use – could not prove that there was any irreparable harm done. “He reasoned”, says Loigman, “that if the tower could go up so quickly, it could come down also, if he decided it should”.

However, Loigman tells TLS, Judge Grasso does intend to move the case along quickly and a hearing could be as early as January or February.

As first reported here on TLS on November 14th, residents of the surrounding area plan to fight the cell tower which was erected on Township property near their developments, claiming it can possibly be harmful to their health, and will also decrease area property values.

On the 23rd of last month, the attorney, Larry Loigman filed for the temporary halt to the tower.

This content, and any other content on TLS, may not be republished or reproduced without prior permission from TLS. Copying or reproducing our content is both against the law and against Halacha. To inquire about using our content, including videos or photos, email us at [email protected].

Stay up to date with our news alerts by following us on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

**Click here to join over 20,000 receiving our Whatsapp Status updates!**

**Click here to join the official TLS WhatsApp Community!**

Got a news tip? Email us at [email protected], Text 415-857-2667, or WhatsApp 609-661-8668.

7 COMMENTS

  1. At least they have good cell service! what more can one ask for just some reliable cell phone signal. I don’t understand what all the brewhaha is all about

  2. The case itself would not be thrown out for lack of proof of an irreparable injury. “Irreparable” in this sense means that if a legal injury has occurred, it is by it’s nature not curable with money. If the suit contained the health-impact claims that have been discussed in previous threads, and if the plaintiffs had presented sufficient proof of such claims, that type of legal injury might have been deemed “irreparable” and justified a temporary injunction. However, the suit did not contain such health claims.

    The suit claims injury in the nature of an impact on property values. That is not an ‘irreparable” injury, but rather an injury which can be cured with some money. It is not surprising that the court would deny temporary relief and choose to decide on whether or not to grant relief until after a trial.

    Another claim in the suit, for example, is that the town’s lease of the site to the cell-tower operator bypassed the public bidding statutes. So the theory goes, if all operators were invited to publicly bid for the right to put a cell tower there, an operator other than the one who constructed the tower might have offered more money to the town for the privilege, and all tax-payers (including the plaintiffs) would have benefited. If the plaintiffs are correct (I have no opinion on that), the court might eventually issue an order requiring the town to bid-out the privilege. That, off course, would not satisfy the plaintiffs’ principle concern. It would give them a short-term win, but one cell tower or another would be staring at them either now or later. Again, the nature of the injury would be fairly easily remedied without the need for the extraordinary grant of a temporary injunction before a full hearing.

    I think the case will prove interesting.

  3. We will see
    quote “The suit claims injury in the nature of an impact on property values”
    this in itself is a looser there are many things that cause propoerty values to be affected ,that would open the door to court actions fopr every single situatuion to be contested on those grounds I will be very hightly surprised if it does not get thrown out based on that.

  4. Not a real loss only a delay at what the residents want. They are very slickly playing the only fight they stand to lose and thus have a real chance of winning. Why some dont care when the township sticks it to you is beyond me. Kol hakovod to these fellows.

  5. I guess no on is really surprised or upset here, and this issue will drop now that there lawyer and a judge told then they can’t win this one.

  6. TOJeff at OLV says:
    quote”that type of legal injury might have been deemed “irreparable” and justified a temporary injunction. However, the suit did not contain such health claims.
    Thats because they don’t exist !

Comments are closed.