Last year, opponents of the redevelopment of the Fulton and Elliott-Chelsea Houses went to court without lawyers. Louis Flores later wrote that, after he “ran out of case law,” he turned to AI. Justice James D’Auguste then found two cited cases that did not exist and others that did not say what the filing claimed.
In his retrospective, Flores turned the missing precedent into part of the indictment: the legal establishment had ignored the issue; “NYCHA was abandoned.”
The dispute was about ULURP, New York City’s public review process for specified land use actions. Created in 1975, it applies to things like rezonings, special permits, certain housing plans and City-property dispositions. The Charter lists the triggers.
Flores’s “Fight for NYCHA” website describes ULURP as required when projects reach a certain “scale or impact” or simply “when projects involve public housing.”
The Charter says no such thing. Albany legislators have repeatedly introduced legislation specifically requiring NYCHA land dispositions to undergo ULURP. The current sponsor memo explains why: “NYCHA is exempt from this rule.”
ULURP does not mean “the public should get a say.” It means the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure. Words mean things. One can argue on a street corner that redevelopment deserves public review, but a lawsuit needs to address the law.
Grok could generate more case names. It could not change the City Charter.