ELIZABETHTOWN — State Supreme Court issued a partial decision this week in the Lewis Family Farm Inc. case.

Oral arguments were presented mid June in cross-claim Article 78 proceedings related to Adirondack Park Agency enforcement on farm-worker housing erected in Essex on the Lewis farm without APA permits.

Personal claims against farmers Sandy and Barbara Lewis were dismissed by Acting Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Meyer “since neither was a party to the enforcement proceeding which culminated in the March 25 (APA determination).”

The $100 motion costs for each defendant have to be repaid to Mr. and Mrs. Lewis.

Meyer also found the Lewis farm is not barred from asserting claims because of litigation dismissed by Judge Kevin Ryan before APA enforcement action was taken.

“The agency has failed to establish the (sic) any of the required elements for collateral estoppel to be applied here, and its motion to dismiss (seven causes of action) …is denied,” Meyer wrote.

He granted APA’s motion to dismiss the fourth cause against it, saying “there is no legal requirement that the agency defer to an opinion of the commissioner of agriculture and markets when interpreting the agency’s own statutory scheme.”

APA spokesman Keith McKeever said the order upholds the authority of the APA Act in APA matters.

“Justice Meyer’s action dismissed Lewis Farm’s claims that APA administrative enforcement violated Section 305-a of Agriculture and Markets Law,” he said in a statement.

But, McKeever said, “this is a preliminary step in the legal process. The order does not determine the merits of the case.”

The matter of jurisdiction over farm-worker housing remains to be decided.

Meyer asked for additional filings from the Attorney General’s Office within 20 days to list everything it takes issue with.

APA will answer remaining claims on the Lewis Family Farm’s petition by July 22, McKeever said.

The farm will file a response after that.

The Lewises’ attorney, John J. Privitera, said, “the Lewis Farm will comply with the court’s schedule for future filings and looks forward to a final resolution of this dispute.”