Summary
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that the plaintiff lacked standing to challenge the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s permanent taking of an easement over Yawkey Way and its subsequent sale to the Boston Red Sox. The court concluded that the plaintiff had no property interest or existing business affected by the taking, was owed no duty to receive a public bidding opportunity, and alleged only speculative injury. The court affirmed judgment on the pleadings for the BRA and the denial of leave to amend the complaint.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Marchese had standing to challenge the Boston Redevelopment Authority's permanent taking and sale of the Yawkey Way easement.
- Whether the sale of the easement rights was exempt from the competitive-bidding requirements of the Uniform Procurement Act under G. L. c. 30B, § 1 (b) (25).
- Whether the Superior Court properly denied Marchese's motion to amend his complaint when the proposed claims would have been futile.
Holdings
- Marchese lacked standing because he had no property interest, adjoining-property interest, existing business, or legally protected right to bid on or acquire the easement, and his alleged economic injury was speculative and indirect.
- A demonstration project plan approved and implemented by an urban renewal agency under G. L. c. 121B, § 46 (f), qualifies as a "plan" under G. L. c. 30B, § 1 (b) (25), so a disposition of real property made pursuant to that plan is exempt from the procurement act's competitive-bidding requirements.
- The Superior Court properly denied Marchese's motion to amend because the proposed claims would have been futile.
Key quotations
“An injury alone, however, is "not enough; a plaintiff must allege a breach of duty owed to it by the public defendant"” (483 Mass. at 157)
“He therefore lacks standing to challenge the 2013 taking.” (483 Mass. at 163)
“Because the plaintiff lacks standing to challenge the BRA's actions in this case, we affirm the motion judge's allowance of the BRA's motion for judgment on the pleadings, as well as the denial of the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend his complaint.” (483 Mass. at 163)
Factual background
The Boston Redevelopment Authority took temporary easement rights over Yawkey Way in 2003 under G. L. c. 121B, § 46 (f), and licensed the area to the Boston Red Sox for use on game days. In 2013, the authority permanently took the easement and sold the easement rights directly to the Red Sox under an approved demonstration project plan. Marchese, a local attorney and business owner who had expressed interest in acquiring the rights, challenged the transaction, claiming that the area was no longer blighted and that he should have been permitted to bid.
Procedural history
Marchese filed a civil action in the nature of certiorari challenging the Boston Redevelopment Authority's permanent taking of the Yawkey Way easement and its sale to the Boston Red Sox, arguing that the authority lacked statutory authority and was required to solicit public bids. The Superior Court granted the authority's motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied Marchese's motion to amend, and concluded that he lacked standing. The Supreme Judicial Court transferred the appeal on its own motion and affirmed.