LONG ISLAND GYNECOLOGICAL SVCS. v. MURPHY

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

2001-05858

Attorney(S)

Alfred J. Skidmore, Hicksville, N.Y., for appellant. John M. Brickman, Great Neck, N.Y., and New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, N.Y. (Rebekah Diller and Arthur Eisenberg of counsel), for respondents (one brief filed).

Judges

Robert J. Miller

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The plaintiff Long Island Gynecological Services, P.C., a reproductive healthcare facility performing abortions, leases space on the second floor of a building owned by 1103 Stewart Avenue Associates. The defendant Richard Wilson regularly positioned himself near the building's main entrance, sitting or kneeling, in an effort to prevent patients from entering to obtain abortions. Wilson also videotaped individuals on more than ten occasions between October 23, 1998, and October 1999. Despite repeated requests by the building manager to leave, Wilson persisted. The plaintiffs initiated this action alleging that Wilson and others trespassed on their private property to interfere with access to abortion services. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, granted summary judgment permanently enjoining the defendants from trespassing, and Wilson appeals from that order.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the defendants, specifically Richard Wilson, committed civil trespass by entering and remaining on the plaintiffs' private property without permission.
Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to a permanent injunction to prevent further trespass, given the threat of continuing trespass and potential irreparable injury.
Whether there existed any triable issue of fact precluding summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Rager v. McCloskey, 305 N.Y. 75, 79	Definition of civil trespass requiring unauthorized entry or refusal to leave after permission is withdrawn.	Used to establish that Wilson’s presence without permission constituted trespass.
Exchange Bakery Restaurant v. Rifkin, 245 N.Y. 260	Entitlement to injunctive relief where continuing trespass threatens irreparable injury.	Supported the plaintiffs’ right to a permanent injunction against trespass.
New York State Natl. Org. for Women v. Terry, 886 F.2d 1339, cert denied 495 U.S. 947	Reinforces that threat of continuing trespass justifies injunctive relief.	Further supported granting the permanent injunction.
Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320	Standard for summary judgment requiring absence of triable issue of fact.	Applied to find Wilson failed to raise a triable issue to defeat summary judgment.
Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557	Requirement that party opposing summary judgment must present sufficient evidence to create a factual dispute.	Confirmed that Wilson’s evidence was insufficient to prevent summary judgment.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court began by defining civil trespass as unauthorized entry or refusal to leave after permission is revoked, citing relevant precedent. It found that Wilson intentionally trespassed by remaining near the building entrance without permission despite repeated requests to leave. The plaintiffs demonstrated entitlement to injunctive relief due to the threat of continuing trespass and potential irreparable harm to their business. Wilson failed to produce sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue of fact, as required to defeat summary judgment. Consequently, the court concluded that the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment permanently enjoining the defendants from trespassing.

Holding and Implications

The order granting summary judgment permanently enjoining the defendants from trespassing on the plaintiffs' property is affirmed, with costs.

The decision directly enforces the plaintiffs’ property rights by preventing the defendants from continuing their trespass. No broader legal precedent was established beyond affirming the application of existing trespass and summary judgment principles to these facts.

Show full summary ...

LONG ISLAND GYNECOLOGICAL SERVICES, P.C., ET AL., respondents, v. JOHN T. MURPHY, ET AL., defendants, RICHARD WILSON, appellant.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff Long Island Gynecological Services, P.C., is a reproductive healthcare facility which leases space on the second floor of a building owned by the plaintiff 1103 Stewart Avenue Associates. Long Island Gynecological Services, P.C., performs abortions on the premises.

The defendant Richard Wilson regularly sat on a lawn chair or kneeled near the main entrance to the building in an effort to prevent patients from entering the premises to obtain abortions. Wilson also videotaped people on more than 10 occasions between October 23, 1998, and October 1999. Wilson was repeatedly asked to leave by the building manager. The plaintiffs commenced this action against Wilson and others alleging that they trespassed on their private property for the purpose of preventing women from entering the premises to obtain abortions.

Liability for civil trespass requires the fact-finder to consider whether the person, without justification or permission, either intentionally entered upon another's property, or, if entry was permitted, that the person refused "to leave after permission to remain ha[d] been withdrawn" (Rager v. McCloskey, 305 N.Y. 75, 79). The threat of continuing trespass entitles a property owner to injunctive relief where irreparable injury may result (see Exchange Bakery Restaurant v. Rifkin, 245 N.Y. 260; New York State Natl. Org. for Women v. Terry, 886 F.2d 1339, cert denied 495 U.S. 947).

Here, the plaintiffs presented evidence establishing that Wilson committed a civil trespass. Wilson failed to submit sufficient evidence to establish the existence of a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320; Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557). The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment permanently enjoining the defendants from trespassing on their property.

Wilson's remaining contentions are without merit.

FLORIO, J.P., S. MILLER, TOWNES and COZIER, JJ., concur.