Mayor Maria Moore of Westhampton Beach and four trustees met privately last night to discuss lawsuits against the village, which is part of Southampton. Plaintiffs charge the towns with “targeting Jewish citizens” and seek damages and legal fees.

27east.com said it was told by Mayor Moore this morning that no action was taken. It also reported she declined to discuss what options the village had. She said a conference has been set up for Tuesday, Jan. 27 involving village attorneys, Judge Kathleen Tomlinson of the U.S. District Court, and the East End Eruv Assn., which launched the lawsuits against Southampton, WHB and Quogue.

Judge Tomlinson is still deciding whether the eruv that has been set up in WHB and which has been proposed for SH and Quogue violates the Establishment Clause of the Second Amendment, which calls for separation of church and state.

whbSeveral lawsuits have been lodged against Southampton, which includes WHB and Quogue. WHB trustees are Ralph Urban, Hank Tucker, Patricia DiBenedetto and Charles Palmer.

The East End Eruv Assn. on Aug. 27, 2013 sued Southampton and its Zoning Board of Appeals, saying the board’s rejection of an eruv, a boundary that defines what Orthodox Jews believe converts a public domain into a private domain, was "motivated by discriminatory intentions and animus towards observant Jews."

The suit, lodged in Brooklyn District Federal Court, asks the court to find the ruling "arbitrary and capricious," and asks that EEEA be paid for the cost of the eruv installation and “further relief as the Court deems appropriate.”

A lawsuit filed in Federal Court on Jan. 13, 2011 against SH, WHB and Quogue said the towns have not strictly enforced signage laws and that the lechis (plastic strips attached to utility poles) are not signs.

Says the suit: "The object, motivation and effect of the actions of the defendants is to suppress the religious practices of the plaintiffs and other Orthodox Jews. These actions have specifically targeted Jewish citizens, as the law that the defendants seek to invoke to prevent the establishment of the Eruv is not enforced against citizens of other faiths."

The suit seeks an injunction against officials from interfering with creation of an eruv as well as damages and legal fees.

Tenafly, N.J., which fought creation of an eruv in the courts, winning at the District level but losing at the Appeals level, had to pay the Tenafly Eruv Assn. more than $300,000 to compensate for its legal expenses.

The case aganst Tenafly was conducted by Robert Sugerman of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, who is also conducting the case against SH, WHB and Quogue.