On August 4th, Justice Lucy Billings granted a preliminary injunction barring the developers at Pier 6 from undertaking any construction “that is irreversible or incapable of restoration to its original condition” pending the Court’s eventual final ruling on the merits of the the BHA’s Petition.  Justice Billings subsequently made public a written decision (Preliminary Injunction Ruling)
memorializing her order, which reiterates her August 4th oral statement that to the extent the developers continue construction activities in this period, they will have to “proceed at their own peril” and that any construction activity that takes place before the new judge, Justice St. George,  issues the final ruling on the merits of the BHA’s Petition “will not affect the court’s determination of the petition.” 

The written decision also explains why the Court did not grant the full preliminary injunction the BHA had sought to stop all construction activity.  In that part of the written decision, Justice Billings observed, among several other reasons, “the lack of a convincing showing that petitioner [the BHA] is likely to prevail on the merits of its claims.”  Justice Billings had not discussed her view of the BHA’s likelihood of success in her oral ruling on August 4th.  The reference in the written decision to a “lack of a convincing showing”  on the merits is disappointing.  Nonetheless, the fact that Justice Billings entered the preliminary injunction as she did suggests that she found the BHA’s claims to be serious.  In any event, the BHA continues to belief that its claims are firmly grounded in the facts and the law, and looks forward to presenting them to Justice St. George, who will decide the ultimate merits of the BHA’s Petition. No timeframe has yet been established for Justice St. George to issue her final ruling.
Read More…