A jury has found actual damages in a case regarding the Costco application in 2015, finding that there were no actual monetary damages to the plaintiff, Wayne Cooke, but also taking punitive measures against two defendants, Daniel Shapiro and Diana Ross, in the amount of just under $102,000 each.
The case stems from a 2015 filing with the town to see a Costco built on land owned by Wayne Cooke and Charlie Weber off of exit 56. The Planning and Zoning commission had approved the application, but the controversy that resulted in the lawsuit took place when the application moved to the Inland Wetlands Commission, of which Shapiro was the chairman, and Ross was the town department head.
In the application, the commission has to determine if the plan for Costco and added parcels meet the environmental standards set in the town code. As is standard on larger applications, the town hired, at the applicants expense, a third party expert to analyze the filings and determine if they were sufficient.
The Commission, after a public bid for proposal process, hired environmental engineering firm Milone and McBroom.
During the process, however, a series of drafts made their way between Ross, Shapiro and Milone and McBroom, where initial findings seemed to be altered by input by Shapiro and Ross. Edits were made, and then implemented, that had the initial findings changed in the final document presented to the applicants and full Commission. The changes in the final draft generally took a less favorable approach to the application than the initial draft written by the third-party expert.
Soon after, once made aware of the behind-the-scenes actions of Ross and Shapiro, Costco pulled their application.
With a few members terms expiring shortly thereafter, Shapiro then led the body in a series of moves that resulted in multiple lawsuits.
Knowing it was likely that Cosgrove would not reappoint him after his actions on the previous Costco application, Shapiro pushed to pass new regulations that would make a Costco re-application more difficult. A rift formed on the commission between those not likely to be reappointed and were pushing to quickly push through new, more restrictive regulations and those who wanted to slow down and follow the more standard process.
Shapiro won. In a move that circumvented even legal review of the new regulations, Shapiro was able to narrowly pass, with a 4-3 vote, the more restrictive regulations. Almost immediately, as had been warned by many, multiple town property owners sued the Inland Wetlands Commission, claiming that the new regulations were unfair and had no basis in law.
As expected, Shapiro was not reappointed when his term was up, and he and the Democrats then began a campaign attacking Cosgrove with a series of letters to newspapers, Shapiro writing a letter attacking Cosgrove and his family, and even attempting to get the state to intervene.
The state declined Shapiro’s request.
Cosgrove then appointed new Commissioners who quickly worked to backtrack on the damage Shapiro caused, and the lawsuits were removed.
And now a jury has found that Shapiro is liable for tortious interference for his actions in the Costco application, along with Ross for her actions. Each was charged punitive damages in the amount of $101,590. Punitive damages are often a multiple of attorneys fees and costs, so it is possible the jury arrived at that number by dividing those fees in half for each defendant.
The ruling is a blow to Cooke, who was hoping to sell his property for approximately 5.6 million dollars to Costco if it moved forward with the project. Instead, the jury capped his losses at $1.
There were significant issues with Cooke’s claims, however. Even if the Inland Wetlands Commission had passed the proposal, there were still many additional regulations and state bodies to pass as it was using state roads. Additionally, a lawsuit was likely as local Democrats had formed a group to fight Costco and were intervenors in the application. This group, led by Penny Bellamy, the former town attorney under Democrat Unk DaRos, had hired an attorney and was likely to try and tie up the case in the legal system.
The case for the plaintiff was initially filed by attorney David Doyle, but soon after was taken over by Tim Herbst. The towns insurance carrier handled defending Shapiro and Ross, led by Tom Gerarde. It is unknown if either side will seek to appeal any part of the decision. It has yet to be determined if the punitive penalties levied on Shapiro and Ross will be covered by the insurance carrier, the town or themselves.