Robins Island Preservation Fund, Inc. v. Southold Development Corporation

959 F.2d 409 (2nd Cir. 1992)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The property under dispute is an island of 445 acres in the Peconic Bay of Long Island. In 1779, Peter Wickham, the then owner of Robins Island, was stripped of title to as punishment for his continued allegiance to the British monarchy. RIPF (P) initiated the present action seeking a declaration of ownership rights in the Island against Southold Development Corp. (D) which planned to develop the island. D traced its title to Benjamin Tallmedge and Caleb Brewster who in 1784 purchased the island in fee simple from the State of New York. D asserts that the seizure and sale of the land was valid. The District Court granted summary judgment to D holding the Act of Attainder of 1779 valid that the action was barred by the statute of limitations, the doctrine of laches and public policy. P appealed. Joseph Wickham Sr. purchased the land in 1734 and devised it to Jr. in estate tail as each male heir would only hold a fee tail interest in the property. Jr. took possession on the death of his father, and upon his death, the land passed to Parker Wickham. During the Revolution, Parker was a loyalist, and from 1776, the Island remained under British control. New York enacted the Act of Attainder in 1779 that called for the forfeiture and sale of estates of person who remained loyal to the crown. New York also abolished the estate tail in 1782. The peace treaty was signed in 1782 and included provisions that British and loyalist property be returned. Upon withdrawal of British troops from New York the land was seized under the 1779 Act. The land was then sold to Benjamin Tallmedge and Caleb Brewster. These treaty violations and other by the British resulted in tensions that threatened to erupt in armed conflict. The Jay Treaty resolved those issues, and that treaty ceased all seizures of lands and allows British subjects to seek redress in American courts. Parker then returned to America after receiving compensation from Great Britain for the loss of his father's estate. P contended in its lawsuit that the Act of 1779 will illegal as it violated the treaty provisions and did not take effect until after the Peace Treaty was signed as the British held the territory; as such the Peace Treaty controlled or in the alternative the Act of 1779 only seized the estate held by Parker and not his following heirs.