212-825-0365info@alblawfirm.com www.alblawfirm.com PAGE 1

WE GET RESULTSADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C.

NEWSLETTER Spring 2014

Who’s in charge when ice is falling?by Adam Leitman Bailey & John Desiderio

the weather begins to warm, chunks of ice and snow will start falling from those heights to the streets and sidewalks below. Possible injury to persons and property may follow.

The City Administrative Code requires that owners maintain all buildings and parts of buildings in a safe condition.

In addition to this general requirement, the law also imposes a specific duty upon building owners to ensure that pedestrian passersby are not in-jured from snow or ice accumulations falling from their buildings.

Owners whose buildings have roofs, ledges, or cornices on which accumu-lated snow and ice is likely to pose a danger to persons and property below must take reasonable steps to prevent ice from falling to the street.

For this purpose, owners can install snow guards which, typically, are not intended to completely hold back the snow, but rather to separate the snow and allow it to break apart in small sections in rising temperatures and thaw-ing conditions.

For buildings where it is not possible to prevent snow and ice from falling to the street, owners must at least rope off the sidewalk or in some other way warn pedestrians to not walk on the sidewalk adjoining their building until ...To read the entire article, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/fallingice.

So far this winter, New York City has had two severe snow-falls, with accompanying frigid temperatures, and it appears that this weather pattern is likely to hold through the end of Febru-ary.

As a result, snow and ice is accumulating on the roofs and ledges of buildings throughout the City and, therefore, when

On Jan. 8, 2014, the DHCR issued the first amendments to the Rent Stabilization Code in some 14 years. While the new amend-ments—27 in all—do have the virtue of making the applicable law easier to find, gathering it all into one place, for the most part, these amendments will simply increase the cost of doing business, without necessarily providing the tenants a corresponding benefit.

In some instances, the amendments are commonplace and sensible. But in oth-ers, there is a certain air of seeking to punish landlords for simply being land-lords. Here’s a look at two of those amendments.

Deemed LeasesWhen the tenant fails to renew the lease when offered, the landlord has, un-

der the Rent Stabilization Code, the option to “deem” the lease renewed. The amendments now specifically limit so-called “deemed leases” to “determining the rent in an overcharge proceeding” [Amendment to RSC §2523.5(c)(2)].

With this kind of language, perhaps intended to be more generous to land-lords, the provision is open to an interpretation that the “deemed lease” is still not a lease, but is a month-to-month tenancy upon which a nonpayment pro-ceeding cannot be brought.

Thus, if the tenant pays the deemed renewal rent, the landlord is not liable for damages. But if the tenant does not pay the rent, the landlord has only the lon-ger, slower remedy of a holdover proceeding—one in which the tenant can cure the default by renewing the lease eventually. Thus, a landlord will have paid out for such a proceeding only to put itself back to where it should have been, with, at most, the cold comfort that the tenant might be held liable for attorneys’ fees.

...To read the entire article, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/firstrent. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Uses Knowl-

edge of “Non-Traditional Family” Succession Laws to Prevail at Trial

For Landlord After Landlord’s Original Law Firm Throws in the

TowelIn March of 2013, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., received an email

from a prominent New York City landlord asking for help with a suc-cession case. The occupant was attempting to succeed to a rent-con-trolled apartment after the recent death of the tenant of record. The occupant was in her early twenties. The monthly rent was less than $300. The potential long-term losses for the landlord were enormous.

A licensee case had already been started by another respected law firm. What little discovery there was, was over and superficial.

The client’s email to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., contained a copy of the transcript of the occupant’s deposition, copies of documents that the occupant produced in discovery and a note from the land-

lord’s attorney which read, “[t]here is little doubt in my mind that she has a valid succession claim to this apartment.”

That’s when the team at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., went to work....Case study continued on page 5.

The First Rent Stabilization Overhaul in 14 Yearsby Dov Treiman & Adam Leitman Bailey

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was Select-ed as a 2014 “Best Law Firm” by U.S.

News and Best Lawyers

Fewer than fifteen percent of law firms nationwide receive a U.S. News rank-ing. The U.S.News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms” rankings are based on a rigorous evaluation process that includes the collection of client and lawyer evalu-ations, peer review from leading attorneys in their field, and review of additional information provided by law firms as part of the formal submission process. To be eligible for a ranking in a particular practice area and metro region, a law firm must have at least one lawyer who is included in Best Lawyers in that particular practice area and metro.

To read more, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/bestlawfirm

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C WE GET RESULTS

www.alblawfirm.com info@alblawfirm.comPAGE 2

APPELLATE BUREAU

BUSINESS LAW

COMMERCIAL LEASING SERVICES

CONDOMINIUM & COOPERATIVE REPRESENTATION

FORECLOSURES, LOAN WORKOUTS & RESTRUCTURING

HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS

PURCHASE & SALE OF MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS & BUILDINGS

REAL ESTATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

TENANT ASSOCIATIONS

TENANT REPRESENTATION

TITLE INSURANCE CLAIMS GROUP

practice areasAdam Leitman Bailey, P.C. is a full service real estate and business law firm. For more information about the

firm or for a complete copy of any of the decisions and articles mentioned, please contact Adam Leitman Bailey at 212-825-0365 or email him at info@alblawfirm.com.

.

CONDOMINIUM/BOARD OF DIRECTOR REPRESENTATION OF NEWLY CONSTRUCTED BUILDINGS

INSURANCE DEFENSE LITIGATION

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

MORTGAGE FINANCE PRACTICE GROUP

PURCHASE & SALE OF HOMES

SHAREHOLDER REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s Use of Arcane and Re-

cently Amended Loft Law Rules Results in Land-lord Paying Hundreds

of Thousands of Dollars and Awarding a Two Year

Rent Waiver for Apart-ment Lease

For decades the tenant lived in a tiny Alphabet City apartment located in a commercial building. Three years ago the tenant learned that the build-ing owner was selling the building to new investors who were planning to convert it to luxury condominium apartments. The owner began to shut off essential building and apartment services. The owner threatened to evict her and offered nothing more

A recent decision from the Su-preme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings upheld claims alleged by the Board of Managers of a Brook-lyn condominium against its Sponsor and architect for construction defects. In this action, the Board of Managers, represented by Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., seeks to recover damages for vari-ous construction defects, including lack of fire stopping and significant

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Successfully Defends Condominium Board’s

Claims for Construction Defects Against a Motion to Dismiss by the Sponsor

and Architect

water infiltration into the building and units. The Sponsor and the Architect both moved to dismiss pursuant to CPLR §3211. The decision upheld the Plaintiff’s claims for breach of con-tract, breach of warranty, professional malprac-tice, fraud and/or negligent misrepresentation and violations of General Business Law, §349.

The decision is notable in several respects. First, with regard to the Architect’s motion, the Architect argued that because it had stopped work on the building more than three years be-fore the filing of the summons with notice, Plain-tiff was barred by the statute of limitations from asserting claims against the Architect. The Court found this argument without merit, noting that the Architect had presented no evidence to con-tradict...To read this entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/condoboard.

than moving expenses. When the building was sold the new owner quickly brought an eviction case against the tenant claiming that her tenancy was not protected because she lived in a com-mercial building with no residential certificate of occupancy. Before giving up, she met with Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.Seeking Loft Law Protection/IMD Status

The team at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., quickly countered by unleashing a detailed investigation and research campaign and soon determined that the tenant may be protected by recent changes in New York City’s Loft Law...To read the entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/arcanerules.

212-825-0365info@alblawfirm.com

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C WE GET RESULTS

www.alblawfirm.com PAGE 3

.

CONDOMINIUM & COOPERATIVE REPRESENTATION

Proactively Thwarting Fake Disability Claims by Adam Leitman Bailey

Discrimination claims. A recent appellate division decision held that the Business Judgment Rule does not protect individual condominium and co-operative board members from some personal tort liability. New York’s public policy of not permitting insurance coverage against the intentional acts of the insured should raise alarm, especially when combined with other recent actions: the flood of frivolous claims of discrimination by rejected purchas-ers, the increase in shareholders demanding access to therapy pets for alleged depression, and other similar issues. Despite a board’s good intentions, an adverse judgment could financially harm a board member and a building.

Qualified attorneys know the limits of the law. They can help you avoid the worst pitfalls. In the case of therapy dogs, for example, they can provide guid-ance on how to separate those with real disabilities from others who are trying to take advantage of the system.

We recently drafted a no-pet policy and conditions for a waiver for a num-ber of our buildings, which included the following paragraph to get around the fakers:

“Prior to occupancy in the building of any service, therapy, or emotional support dog, the applicant or shareholder/resident shall submit to the lessor: (a) proof that any such dog is duly licensed by the City of New York; and (b) proof that the dog has received such vaccinations as are required by law to be administered to the dog. Proof of vaccinations shall also be submitted respecting any other service, therapy, or emotional support animal for which vaccinations are required by law. In the case of a service dog, where the service it provides is not readily apparent, the applicant or shareholder/resident shall also submit proof that the dog has been issued a tag by the City of... To read this entire article online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/disabilityclaims.

by Susan StellinGetting a Dog Into a No-Pet Building

What does it take to get a dog into a no-pet building? The question is becoming a hot topic in New York City. Because depending on whom you ask, the answer is A) a legitimate disability or B) a dubious note from a doctor or therapist...

But denying a request for a disability accommodation can have negative consequences, too. “No one wants to be held liable for dis-criminatory conduct,” said Adam Leitman Bailey, a lawyer who represents rental buildings, co-ops and condos. “Most boards leave it up to their at-torneys to make these decisions.”

Mr. Bailey says he reviews at least one request a month for a waiver of a no-pet rule to allow for a service or emotional-support animal — usually a dog, although other animals, like birds, may qualify. He recommends approving about half of these requests, suggesting a denial if the documen-tation is thin.

“We require a lot of information,” Mr. Bailey said, “and often they can’t provide it... To read this entire article online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/nopetbuilding.

Explaining Cumulative Voting to Cooperative Corporation

A special meeting calling for the removal of a director of a co-operative corporation led to the obvious question; what percent-age of votes would be required to remove the director? A majority of all shares? A majority of just the shares present at the meet-ing? A super-majority ? The answer for this particular cooperative

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., correctly determined lay in a brief, yet densely worded provision of New York State Business Corporations Law (BCL) that controls when a corporation uses cumulative voting to elect directors.

Cumulative voting allows for proportionate representation that depends on the number of shares each shareholder entitled to vote holds. When electing directors (typically at the annual shareholder meeting) each shareholder gets a number of votes equal to the number of shares they own multiplied by the number of seats up for election. The shareholder may then cast all of his votes towards one single director, or he may distribute his votes among a number of candidates. To illustrate with an example, if there were five seats up for election, a shareholder who owned 100 shares would get 500 votes, and the shareholder can allocate those 500 votes in any manner that adds up to 500 (e.g. 500 votes for a single candidate, or 250 votes for two candidates, or 100 votes for each of five candidates, or 497 votes for one candidate, 2 votes for another and 1 vote for a third, etc.). The method of voting is established by the corporation’s governing documents.

When a corporation uses cumulative voting to elect directors, Business Corporations Law § 706(c) provides a special rule for the removal of a direc-tor: “No director may be removed when the votes cast against his removal would be sufficient to elect him if voted cumulatively at an election at which the same total number of votes were cast and the entire board . . .were then being elected.” In other words, a director cannot be removed if the number of votes cast against his removal is equal to or more than the minimum number of votes necessary to guarantee election in the original election.

The words are certainly confusing, but it can be neatly expressed with a mathematical formula. And for those whose memories of high school algebra are not so fond, skip the formula, and go directly to the few examples that follow.

The formula: P = 1/ (D+1) where “P” represents the minimum percentage of votes a candidate would have to receive in order to assure being elected in vote for the full board the director, and “D” represents the number of seats on the board of directors.

For this particular cooperative, where there are five directors on the board, D = 5, and P would equal 16 2/3%. [1/ (1+5)]

Thus, by operation of the Business Corporations Law, if more than 16 2/3% of the votes cast are against removal of the director (i.e. fewer than 83 1/3% vote for removal) the director will not be removed. Thus, even an over-whelming super-majority of 75% would not be enough to remove a director.

It is a counter-intuitive result, so again it is best to illustrate with examples:Example 1: If there are 6,000 shares represented at the special meeting,

and the vote is 3,000 for the director’s removal and 2,999 against, the motion would NOT carry (and the director would not be removed), because more than 16 2/3 percent (1,000) voted against removal.

Example 2: If there are 6,000 shares represented at the meeting, and the vote is 4,500 for removal and 1,500 against, the motion again would NOT carry, because more than 16 2/3 percent (1,000) voted... To read this entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/cumulativevoting.

WE GET RESULTS

www.alblawfirm.com info@alblawfirm.comPAGE 4

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C.

Real Estate Litigation/ Title InsuranceUsing a Unpublished Contractor De-cision by Judge and Finite Details of General Business Law, Adam Leitman

Bailey, P.C. Prevails at Trial

In 2008 when the borrower defaulted on her mortgage pay-ments, the lender commenced what it believed would be a routine foreclosure action in Supreme Court, Suffolk County. However, several named defendants in that action (heirs of the deceased previous record title holder of the premises) filed a third-party

complaint against the borrower and the lender, in relevant part, claiming that the borrower, as trustee and executrix of the trust and estate of the deceased, improperly executed a deed for the premises to herself, improperly executed a mortgage and then improperly refinanced the mortgage with the lender. The third-party plaintiffs alleged that the insured had no authority to transfer the premises to herself and to take the loan and give the mortgage, such actions constituting self-dealing. The third-party plaintiffs sought vacatur of the deed and discharge of the mortgage, as well as monetary damages.

The borrower did not appear in the action. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., was brought in to defend against the third-party plaintiffs’ claims.

Factual BackgroundThe deceased passed away in 2004, leaving a last will and testament. In

The client, a Westchester County homeowner, was sued for a full repaving of a home driveway pursuant to a written contract. The work was done in what plaintiff contractor asserted was a workmanlike manner; the client was dissatisfied because of de-fective installation work and collateral damage to the property.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. did not draft the pleadings and was substituted in as counsel only a few months pre-trial. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. prepared a two-pronged defense, based legally on failure to comply with statutory require-ments and factually on poor workmanship.

At trial, the first witness was the contractor. On cross-examination, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. brought out that the contractor was duly licensed as a home improvement contractor, but that his written contract and bill failed to include matters required under the General Business Law, including the contractor’s license number, a statement of when the work would start and be substantially done and the consumer’s right to revoke the contract within three business days. Neither the witness nor the opposing counsel appeared to understand the legal consequences of the witness’s answers.

Our legal research had revealed that the Judge before whom we were to appear had unpublished decisions and a bar journal article which supported our position that a failure to include those terms required dismissal... At the conclusion of the witness’s testimony Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. moved orally to dismiss and at the Court’s direction thereafter submitted a written motion. In a written decision, the Judge held the language of the General Business Law to be mandatory and enacted for the benefit of homeowners as a class. The complaint was dismissed. Since the defects in the plaintiff contractor’s contract could not be retroactively fixed, we never reached a trial on the merits of the claim and the contractor was foreclosed from collecting on his contract.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was represented by partner Colin E. Kaufman.To read the entire case study, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/finitedetails.

2005, following a petition by the borrower, the will was probated in the Surro-gate’s Court, Suffolk County. The will designated the borrower as the executrix of the deceased’s estate. The will also designated the borrower as the trustee of a cer-tain trust created under the will. The third-party plaintiffs were named beneficia-ries under the will. The will expressly gave the borrower, as executrix and trustee, the power to sell the premises. In July of 2006, the borrower transferred title to the premises from “the borrower as trustee pursuant to letters of trusteeship under the will of the deceased” to the borrower, individually. No consideration was cited in the deed. On the same day, the borrower gave a mortgage to a bank, secured by the premises for $125,000.00. In July of 2007, the borrower refinanced and gave a mortgage to the insured secured by the premises for $250,000.00.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s investigation and research confirmed that the bor-rower’s self dealing rendered her deed to herself voidable. Because the lender was on inquiry notice regarding the self-dealing via the face of the deed, which clearly indicated that the borrower had, in her capacity as executrix, conveyed the prem-ises to herself in her individual capacity, the bank lacked the bona fides necessary to avoid the natural consequences of voiding that deed, to wit, the avoidance of its mortgage.

Following the Money Realizing that the lender’s lien could be wiped out entirely, Adam Leitman

Bailey, P.C., undertook a detailed investigation into the flow of the funds of the original loan and the lender’s loan proceeds to ascertain whether expenditure of the funds would support an equitable lien in favor of the lender. An equitable lien could provide a lender with a remedy if the lender can demonstrate that its loan proceeds were used to make improvements, repairs or other expenditure that per-manently increases the value of the premises. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. served subpoenas for the borrower’s several bank accounts, which led to the discovery of additional bank accounts and information and the identity of a contractor who performed work on the subject premises.

Vladimir Mironenko of Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. represented the lender....To read the entire case study, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/equitablelien.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., Uncovers and Negotiates Equitable Lien for

Insured in Foreclosure Action and Obtains Settlement Check for Insured

at the Closing Table

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Wins Case for Selling of Commercial Property:

Contract Disclaimers Are Enforceable

This case strongly reaffirms that with respect to real property trans-actions, the parties will be held to the terms of the agreement(s) they made. In this case, the plaintiff had entered into agreements with the seller to purchase a building in a piecemeal fashion. The purchaser first purchased a 7% interest for two million dollars and agreed to

purchase the remaining 93% for approximately another 16 million dollars by a date certain. The agreement contained a provision that in the event that the pur-chaser did not close on time, that the deed for the 7% interest would revert to the seller. Stated differently, the purchaser would lose two million dollars.

The agreements also contained provisions stating that the purchaser was tak-ing the property “as is” and after an inspection, etc. Also, the parties agreed the purchaser would not file a lis pendens for any reason.

Purchaser could not come up with the remaining $16mm and the seller took back the deed. Purchaser sued and placed a lis pendens on the property. Purchaser asserted, among other things, that the building was violative of the zoning ordi-nance because it was too tall and therefore he had a valid reason for not closing and that he had been defrauded, along with several other that the building was violative of the zoning ordinance because it was too tall and therefore he had a ...To read the entire case study, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/realproperty.

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C WE GET RESULTS

www.alblawfirm.com info@alblawfirm.comPAGE 5

.

LANDLORD-TENANT REPRESENTATIONAdam Leitman Bailey, P.C., Uses Knowledge of “Non-Traditional Family” Succession

Laws to Prevail at trial for Landlord after Landlord’s Original Law Firm Throws in

the Towel

Applicable lawPursuant to the succession laws in New York, with certain exceptions, an in-

dividual may obtain rights to a rent-regulated apartment if she co-resided with the tenant of record for at least two-consecutive years before the tenant of record passed away or permanently vacated the apartment and if she is a “family mem-ber” of the tenant of record. Currently, the statutorily protected list of family members includes, “spouse, son, daughter, stepson, stepdaughter, father, moth-er, stepfather, stepmother, brother, sister, grandfather, grandmother, grandson, granddaughter, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, or daughter-in-law of the tenant.” An individual who is not on this protected list can still obtain suc-cession rights if she can demonstrate the required co-residency and demonstrate an emotional and financial commitment and interdependence between herself and the tenant of record.

Initial Factual InvestigationThe team immediately undertook a detailed factual investigation into every

aspect of the occupant’s life and the life of the tenant of record. We poured over every word and every number in the documents produced during discovery, in-cluding tax records, employment records, medical records, United States Postal Service records, bank statements, nursing home records, death records and af-fidavits. We became suspicious that the occupant’s documents began appearing at the subject apartment exactly two years and one month before the tenant of record’s death. Leaving no stone unturned, we performed our own due diligence and factual investigation checking public records and verifying the authenticity of the various documents.

We also uncovered that, at best, the occupant was the tenant of record’s first cousin twice removed, not a granddaughter as she had claimed.

Pre-Trial StrategyWe now knew that the occupant was a “non-traditional family” member of

the tenant of record as statutorily defined for succession purposes. Accordingly she would be required to prove, not just co-residency, but also an emotional and financial commitment and interdependence between herself and her cousin.

However, we faced a risk of going straight to trial because the deposition conducted by the landlord’s prior attorney did not adequately cover this issue, and therefore, did not adequately lock the occupant into a trial position. And, because discovery was over, we could not obtain a follow up deposition or ad-ditional documents.

To overcome this deficiency and the risk of surprise at trial, we made a pre-trial motion, which narrowed the issues, forced the tenant to disclose her defenses and locked the tenant into positions that she would be required to stick with at trial.

Using Similarities with the Famous case of Fort Washington Holdings, LLC v. Abbott at Trial

The discovery documents, the deposition testimony and the occupant’s re-sponses to the pre-trial motion revealed that while the occupant had a chance of demonstrating some emotional ties to the tenant of record—which was un-derstandable because they were after all related—she had virtually no financial ties to him.

The team realized that the lack of financial commitment and interdependence was similar to that in the famous case of Fort Washington Holdings, LLC v Ab-bott, in which Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., prevailed in a jury-trial...To read this entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/successionlaws.

Continued from page 1

A property owner retained Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. to defend an Environmental Control Board violation that alleged a failure to prevent unwarranted or unnecessary alarms at the subject premis-es. Using the defense of improper service, the Administrative Law Judge dismissed the violation against the property owner.

New York State law requires that a property owner have notice of any viola-tions against it. Specifically, the law requires that an issuing officer first attempt personal service of a violation. An issuing officer can “nail and mail” a violation only after it has failed to achieve personal service. Such service is achieved by posting the violation to a conspicuous location and mailing it to the property owner.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., initially defended the property owner on the basis that the issuing officer improperly served the notice of the violation according to New York State law. Specifically, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. alleged that the issuing officer did not make a reasonable attempt to personally serve the viola-tion before it mailed service. In fact, the issuing officer only attempted personal service by visiting the premises on one occasion. Further, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. argued that the issuing officer failed to post the violation in an obvious enough location to put the property owner on notice of the violation.

The New York Fire Department Petitioner in this proceeding rebutted by pro-viding print outs of affidavits of service that confirmed the manner in which the issuing officer gave notice of the violation to the property owner. The Adminis-trative Law Judge was persuaded by this evidence and determined that the issu-ing officer did, in fact, comply with New York State law.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., however, artfully made a third procedural argu-ment that successfully defended the property owner against this violation. It found compelling evidence of improper service when it argued that the subse-quent mailing of the violation did not comply with the New York State law. The New York Fire Department mailed the violation, after failing to obtain personal service, to the incorrect address. It merely relied on the address provided by the Department of Finance which was in error. A review of the City maps for the subject premises revealed that the address that Petitioner mailed...To read this entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/ecbviolation.

Improper Service Forces Judge to Dis-cuss Environmental Control Board

Violation

Adam Leitman Bailey takes on adversary in New York State Supreme Court

212-825-0365info@alblawfirm.com

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C WE GET RESULTS

www.alblawfirm.com PAGE 6

.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Eviction Allows Developer to Demolish On Time

LANDLORD-TENANT REPRESENTATION ContinuedTenant Sues for Harassment, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Wins for Landlord and Obtains

Attorney Fee AwardWhen a landlord sought Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s help after his tenant

commenced a harassment proceeding, the attorneys at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. defended the landlord, prevailed on the case, and were awarded legal fees.

This case demonstrates the shortcomings of an overly aggressive attorney pushing a weak position and getting punished for it.

A tenant alleged that her landlord used force, threatened the use of force or implied the use of force; repeatedly brought court cases against her for no good reason; and repeatedly caused or permitted acts or omissions that sub-stantially interfered with or disturbed her comfort, peace or quiet.

The Court insisted that Petitioner’s allegations did not in fact amount to harassment, which prompted the tenant to agree to withdraw her peti-tion. However, the tenant never followed through with her promise and in-stead attempted to use aggression to overcome her weak position. At trial the case was quickly dismissed and the landlord’s motion for legal fees was granted.

Adam Leitman Bailey represented the client in this matter...To read this entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/landlordwin.

Property owner/developer needed the removal of all com-mercial tenants in order to begin demolition before end of year. Although the commercial tenants had no leases, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was given only two months to obtain possession. The tenant’s answer created several creative and some not so creative

defenses to the eviction action. Taking a risk by moving for summary judgment on the cases instead of proceeding to a trial and praying that the judge would decide the case from the bench, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client needed the stars to align just right.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s attorneys knew that they had sufficiently dis-proved the tenant’s defenses. Now they needed a judge to understand its client’s plight and decide the motion from the bench and write up the judgment of possession within a few days.

After argument and asking both sides to negotiate for a few hours while the papers were reviewed, the judge came back with a written partial summary judg-ment decision in Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s favor. The tenant’s only sophisti-cated argument would, according to the judge, be held in abeyance and decided at another time.

Understanding that Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was not going to allow any delays, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys convinced one tenant attorney to withdraw its motion. This caused an immediate eviction of the subtenant who would have no defenses left.

The judge made the negotiation easier when she orally told the tenant that he would be losing the case. By offering a modest sum of money for possession from the tenant of record, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was able to convince the sub-tenants to surrender as well with there being no issues left to argue.

Adam Leitman Bailey and Christopher Halligan argued the motion and negotiated the settlements and Dov Treiman prepared the motion and settle-ment papers on behalf of the property owner...To read this entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/demolish.

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C. SUCCEEDS IN BROKERING A FAVORABLE BUYOUT FOR

RESIDENTIAL TENANTS WHOSE APARTMENT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY

DAMAGED BY A FIREIn this matter, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client, a famous

American singer, songwriter and composer and her longtime partner, were lessees of a residential unit, which was substantially destroyed as a result of a fire. The New York City Fire Depart-ment investigated the loss and opined that the fire was caused by a candle at the foot of the clients’ bed that lit the bedsheets on fire

and spread to the remaining areas of the unit, which the clients allegedly failed to put out before they went to sleep.

Subsequently, the insurance company for the owner of the unit, as subrogee, sued the clients individually for damages totaling over $100,000, resulting from the fire. Adam Leitman Baliey, P.C. then tendered to the clients’ insurance car-rier demanding a complete defense and indemnity for the alleged loss under the provisions of the clients’ renters insurance policy. Consequently, the clients’ insurance carrier accepted the clients’ tender.

While simultaneously defending the clients in connection with thesubroga-tion action against the unit owner’s insurance company, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. filed an HP proceeding against the unit owner seeking, among other things, to force the owner to immediately remediate the subject premises and restore the clients to possession.

Working on parallel tracks, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. successfully defended the clients in the insurance action by forcing the clients’ insurance company to cover all of the damages caused by the fire, while negotiating an extremely favor-able buyout for the apartment for the clients.

Colin E. Kaufman and Massimo F. D’Angelo handled the defense of the in-surance action and Jamie Share Friedland prepared the complaint in the HP proceeding.

Massimo F. D’Angelo and Christopher E. Halligan brokered the buyout on behalf of the clients...To read this entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/buyoutandfire.

Through Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s Ef-forts, a Developmentally Disabled Adult has his Section 8 Benefits Restored and

is Able to Retain his ApartmentSection 8 benefits provide a needed subsidy for the less fortu-

nate and especially for those who are developmentally disabled.One such disabled adult came to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

after his Section 8 benefits had been terminated by the Depart-ment of Housing Preservation and Development (“HPD”). An investigator for HPD had claimed that the adult was not primarily

residing in his apartment but rather in a cooperative apartment that he owed. At a hearing before HPD, the adult and his mother tried to demonstrate to HPD’s satisfaction that the adult actually resided in his own apartment and that the cooperative apartment was owned by the mother. However, HPD appeared to already have its mind made up and the termination was upheld.

For the adult, this was disastrous: due to his condition, he could not work and since he subsided on meager SSI benefits, he simply could not afford to remain in the apartment without the Section 8 subsidy.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. took two steps to protect this individual. First, it commenced an article 78 proceeding to vacate and annul HPD’s determination. Even though the record below was not fully developed (given that the adult’s mother did most of the testifying), the firm was still able to demonstrate that....To read the entire case study, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/section8benefits.

212-825-0365info@alblawfirm.com

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C WE GET RESULTS

www.alblawfirm.com PAGE 7

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.120 Broadway, 17th FloorNew York, New York 10271

Tel: 212-825-0365Email: info@alblawfirm.com

.

Purchase & Sale of HomesAdam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Visits Emergen-

cy Room to get Loan Closed

Mortgage Finance

Snowy days will not slow down the transactional department at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. During a recent snowstorm Adam Leit-man Bailey, P.C represented a lender at a real property purchase closing in Westchester county.

The purchasers were a lovely working couple purchasing their first home. Although the husband arrived early to the closing, his

wife, who is a veterinarian, was called in for emergency surgery at the last mo-ment and was not going to make it to the closing. It looked as if the closing would be adjourned and the buyer’s could lose their locked in interest rate.

Rather then adjourn the closing, the closing attorney from Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. drove to the veterinary hospital where the surgery was to be per-formed and met with the purchaser to sign a Power of Attorney right before her surgery was to start. The Power of Attorney allowed her husband to sign all of the paperwork for the closing allowing the transaction to close successfully and keep their interest rate. Everyone was extremely grateful to Adam Leitman Bai-ley, P.C. for going the extra mile in the snow to get the deal done.

Rosemary Liuzzo Mohamed represented Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C...To read this entire case study online, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/emer-gencyroom.

by Kate RogersHow to Prep Your Home for The Market

If you’re looking to list your home, here are a few things you can do to get your property ready to list:

Think Like the Buyer...Many of the things that make a property feel like “home” to its current owner

may turn off potential buyers, adds Adam Leitman Bailey, founder of New York City-based real estate law firm Adam Leitman Bailey P.C.

“The things that you think make it a great place to live look like trash to the average buyer,” he says. “They need to envision themselves in that space, not you living there.”...

Invest for Bigger Returns Many buyers aren’t looking to invest in a “fixer-upper,” says Leitman Bailey,

so taking care of issues like broken air conditioners, leaky faucets or tiles on the roof, can go a long way in attracting more buyers and increasing a home’s value.

“All of those things can sometimes cause buyers to walk away, because they don’t want to deal with the problem or over estimate the cost of repairs,” he says.

...To read the entire article, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/prepyourhome.

by Kate Rogers

Tips for College Students on How to Handle Apartment Woes

For many college students, renting a house or apartment off campus brings a higher level of freedom, but it can also come with more responsibility and unexpected chal-lenges and costs.

When it comes to finding a place to stay, Adam Leitman Bailey, a real estate at-torney who draws up leases for apartment complexes across the country, says college students tend to only consider the basics during their search.

“They are thinking about if the space is clean and what the monthly rent is. They are not thinking about the eventual problems they may have.”

He says students leasing in apartment complexes should attempt to learn about their landlords and supers before moving in by reading online reviews and talking to current and former tenants. If a space is great, but management may not be tenant-friendly, he says college students better “be ready to do their own repairs.”

For college students considering moving out of campus housing, here are a few po-tential bumps in the road and how to handle them:

No.1: Roommate issues. If your name is on the lease, it’s unlikely you will be able to get out of your commitment without facing a significant financial penalty--even if you have issues with your roommates or the space. “Sometimes people move in, find out they hate their roommates or have to move to another city for a job or opportunity,” Leitman Bailey says. “You usually are not off the hook unless you find a replacement. If you do, be sure you get it in writing.”

No. 2: Repairs. In nearly every state, laws tend to lean in tenants’ favor, says Leitman Bailey, so students should make sure they know their rights when it comes apartment requirements, repairs and billing issues. “Landlords are required to make all repairs and provide you with a habitable home,” he says. “If you are not getting things done: if you have rodents or a doorbell is not working, small claims court is very inexpensive and it may be worth it for you to take them there.”

No. 3: Security deposits. Many landlords don’t give back security deposits, Leitman Bailey cautions. To get your money back, make sure to read the lease terms and meet all the conditions like filling in holes in the wall, re-painting or cleaning. “Take pictures and video too, hold up a newspaper to show the dates, so you have proof this hap-pened,” he says. “So if you have to sue in small claims court, you can.”

No. 4: Consider a roommate contract. This can help resolve potential issues that could crop up including guarantor issues, boyfriends or girlfriends that move in unex-pectedly, and more.

...To read the entire article, please visit www.alblawfirm.com/apartmentwoes.

PAGE 8

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C. WE GET RESULTS

ADAM LEITMAN BAILEY, P.C. 120 Broadway, 17th FloorNew York, New York 10271

Tel: 212-825-0365Email: info@alblawfirm.com

RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED