A New York State Supreme Court Justice on Thursday ordered East Hampton Town and the town trustees, defendants in parallel lawsuits brought in 2009 over ownership of a stretch of Napeague ocean beach popularly known as Truck Beach, to pay a total of $389,060 in the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees.
Justice Paul Baisley Jr. ordered the town and trustees to pay $340,000 for attorneys' fees and $17,000 in costs and disbursements to the Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman firm; and $32,000 for attorney's fees and $60 in costs and disbursements to the Esseks, Hefter, Angel, Di Talia & Pasca firm. Justice Baisley has consistently sided with the Napeague property owners along the 4,000-foot stretch of beach, who asserted that the deeds to their properties extend to the mean high water mark.
James Catterson of the former firm, and Stephen Angel of the latter firm, represent the plaintiffs. Mr. Catterson is a former justice of both State Supreme Court in Suffolk County and the Appellate Division, First Judicial Department.
The town and trustees are ordered to make the payments within 15 days of Thursday's order.
The town and trustees had been victorious in a 2016 bench trial, when Justice Ralph Gazzillo ruled that an 1882 deed in which the trustees conveyed some 1,000 acres on Napeague to Arthur Benson contained a reservation allowing the public to use the homeowners associations' portion of the beach for fishing and fishing-related purposes. But a February 2021 Appellate Division ruling reversed much of that decision, declaring that the property owners do, in fact, own the beach.
Justice Baisley also ruled that the reservation did not confer authority to issue permits allowing the public to drive and park vehicles on any portion of the beach owned by the homeowners' associations. A modified judgment in April 2021 enjoined the town from issuing permits "purporting to authorize their holders to operate and park vehicles" on the beach and directed the town and trustees to revoke all beach driving permits "that do not expressly prohibit driving or parking on the beach."
Last year, Justice Baisley held the town and the trustees in contempt and ordered that more than 6,000 beach driving permits be revoked and levied a $239,000 fine, payable to five homeowners' associations and four individuals, for violating the 2021 court decision that the stretch of shoreline in question was privately owned. He also ordered the town and trustees to pay the plaintiffs' costs and attorneys' fees associated with the contempt motion and a contempt hearing held in January and February 2022.
In that hearing, Mr. Catterson and Mr. Angel repeatedly tried to portray a concerted effort by town officials to stall and otherwise fail to take measures to enforce a prohibition of vehicles on the beach, following the February 2021 ruling overturning the prior decision. The town and trustees "have clearly demonstrated an appallingly studied indifference and deliberate disobedience to the lawful and unequivocal orders of this court," Justice Baisley wrote.
In March, Justice Baisley sided with the plaintiffs by granting five property owners associations' motions to dismiss separate complaints by the town and the trustees along with a dozen fishermen. Both sought clarification of the reservation in an 1882 deed in which the trustees conveyed some 1,000 acres on Napeague to Arthur Benson. He also enjoined all parties from any further filing regarding the scope of the reservation in the Benson deed without the court's approval.
Neither Francis Bock, clerk of the trustees, Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc, nor Daniel Rodgers, an attorney representing fishermen cited for trespassing during a 2021 act of civil disobedience on the beach, could immediately be reached for comment.
