A lawsuit aimed at shutting down the controversial Ground Zero mosque may get tossed on a technicality because opponents failed to properly name the project's owners.Sounds like an issue with Article 10 of the CLPR, including misjoinder of parties and that the plaintiffs could get a stipulation to correct the summons and complaint, but it is bad lawyering on their part to have not named all potential parties to the action.
The American Center for Law and Justice, a conservative advocacy group suing on behalf of retired firefighter and 9/11 responder Timothy Brown, had named mosque financier Sharif El-Gamal's company, Soho Properties -- rather than the legal owner, 45 Park Place Partners LLC -- in court papers.
That technicality, argued 45 Park Place Partners attorney Adam Leitman Bailey in papers filed Friday, is one more reason why the suit should be tossed.
The two sides are scheduled to be back in Manhattan Supreme Court tomorrow.
"I think it's a pretty specious argument," countered Brett Joshpe, lawyer for the American Center for Law and Justice.
"Sharif El-Gamal, everyone knows he is the owner of the project. He might have various entities set up, but he was the one served and represented all along that Soho Properties is the owner."
But Bailey said by naming the wrong party, Brown and the ACLJ missed their opportunity to sue because their 120-day window had passed.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Park51 Suit May Be Tossed On Technicality
Always name all the potential parties to a suit because if you fail to do so, you might end up losing your right to sue. That's the situation potentially facing Timothy Brown and opponents to the Park51/Cordoba House project near Ground Zero.