Opponents of the Atlantic Yards haven’t given up just yet, despite news that the project has a new, wealthy backer.

Using an eminent domain dispute to push their cause, an anti-Yards coalition will have its case - Goldstein et al. v. Urban Development Corp - heard by New York’s Appeals Court, the state’s highest court, on October 14 in Albany.

The group has sued the New York State Empire Development Corporation (NYSEDC) for its intended use of eminent domain to seize property for developer Bruce Ratner, who plans to build a new basketball arena and residential buildings on a 22-acre site in Prospect Heights.

The Appeals Court will decide if a “public use” term in the state constitution’s eminent domain clause applies to the Atlantic Yards project; whether the project intends to honor a state-required low-income housing requirement; and evaluate the project’s public use component versus the public benefits it has promised.

The Appeals Court case coincides with the release of a report, prepared by the Institute for Justice (IJ), showing New York State’s eminent domain practices are among the worst in the country.

IJ is a civil liberties law firm that litigated the 2005 eminent domain case Kelo v. City of New London before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The report found New York abuses its eminent domain powers to seize public property for private development projects more often than most states.

“New York law not only makes it easy to condemn property, it actively encourages city agencies to do so,” the report said. “In this perverse system, city agencies and private developers are actually encouraged to team up together against local property owners.”

The report cited the Goldstein case could reverse the trend and set an important precedent.

“If owning a piece of property is going to mean anything, it is imperative that New York’s high court stop [eminent domain] abuse once and for all,” an IJ senior attorney said. “They have that opportunity with the Goldstein case.”