Legal Talk for Co-ops and Condos (Legal Talk by Habitat Magazine)

Send us a text

Steven Sladkus, partner, Schwartz Sladkus Reich Greenberg Atlas, is interviewed by Habitat Magazine's Carol Ott.

Board lessons to learn:

• Get involved.  If there are complaints being made by neighbors, the board has a fiduciary duty to all shareholders to make sure they can peaceably enjoy their apartments. So when a dog is barking and it's bothering the use and occupancy of the apartments of the people next door, the board should get involved.
• The first step. Take a conciliatory approach. Write a friendly letter saying, "The board has received complaints about your barking dog. Please do your best to keep your dog under control and be aware of the problem." A lot of times that works.
• The second step. If complaints keep coming in from the neighbors, the board may decide to press further and say, "Look, we're not going to go nuclear yet, but we want to see some proof that you're doing something affirmatively.”
• The nuclear threat. Nuclear is very subjective, but nuclear is sending somebody a notice to say that if the situation isn’t cured within 30 days — which is the typical timeframe for a nuisance under a proprietary lease — the board will seek to terminate the lease.
• Take note.  A notice of termination will get the shareholder’s attention, but you don’t actually have to follow through with it. A board has a very wide latitude to do what it wants to resolve the situation, but it also has the latitude to press things as hard as it deems necessary.

**Music by 4 AM Party by Alex Gross licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Ingrid Manevitz, a partner at Seyfarth Shaw, is interviewed by Habitat Magazine's Carol Ott.

• What it is. Typically in many condominium buildings, the right of first refusal works like this: when a unit-owner goes to sell or lease their unit they provide a copy of the fully executed lease or fully executed contract of sale to the board, usually by certified mail. The board has a certain period of time in which to exercise its right of first refusal, which means to either purchase or lease the unit on the same terms and conditions that the prospective purchaser or lessee is offering. The procedures for this are in the condo’s bylaws.
• The wrinkle. In order to exercise this right, many condo bylaws stipulate that a board needs unit-owner approval. The bylaws usually state a time period, often 20 or 30 days, to get this done. The clock starts as soon as the package gets submitted, usually to the management company, and doesn’t get to the board quickly. So if the time period is 20 days, it could really be 10 days before the package gets in front of the board. The board will then speak with its lawyer and if it decides to proceed, it has to go out and get all the unit-owners or a majority of them to approve to exercise the right.
• The workaround. The right of first refusal is usually done sparingly, often when there is someone the board doesn't want the apartment leased to or owned by. One way to make this process easier would be to amend the condo bylaws to eliminate the need to seek unit-owner approval. The board would then have sole discretion when to exercise this right.

**Music by 4 AM Party by Alex Gross licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Moshe Bobker, partner, Tane Waterman & Wurtzel, is interviewed by Habitat magazine’s Paula Chin.

Board lessons to learn:

-The backstory. An elderly shareholder was causing safety and nuisance issues with her hoarding, and neighbors were complaining about odors and infestation. The board tried to resolve the issue by having the super help her clear things out. But after making some progress, she became unwilling and the problem continued.

-Taking a hard line. The board realized it had to be more aggressive and sent a notice of cure, which got no response. A holdover proceeding was commenced to terminate the lease, and the court referred the case to various city agencies to help the woman resolve the problem. The situation had been pending a longtime, but an agreement was finally reached where she will have someone come in to clean regularly and allow inspections of the apartment.

-The takeaway. Unlike other breachers of the proprietary lease, such as subletting, where it’s a default that’s either cured or not, boards should be cognizant that even when a hoarding situation gets better, the problem is likely to pop up again. It’s not something that is going to be resolved quickly in a one-time deal.

**Music by 4 AM Party by Alex Gross licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Andrew Brucker, partner, Armstrong Teasdale, is interviewed by Habitat Magazine’s Carol Ott.

Board lessons to learn:

• For minor changes. If it’s just an amendment, send out a short one- or two-page replication of what was changed, and say, “Please staple this to your proprietary lease.” You have to do this because if you ever end up taking a shareholder to court for violating this change, a judge is going to say, “But they never got a copy.” 
• When the change is big. We create a brand new lease called an “amended and restated lease.” It’s the new lease with all the provisions. And we ask everyone to re-sign it.
• When the bank has the lease. If shareholders have financed their purchase, the bank has the original lease. So they should communicate with the bank, get the old lease and replace it with the new one. Banks don’t really care about changes unless it affects them in some way, so that could be a problem. But in most cases, you’re not going to make major changes everywhere. You’re going to change two, three or maybe four provisions.
• Why bother with changes in the first place. Simple. Times change, and provisions need to be updated every five or 10 years.

**Music by 4 AM Party by Alex Gross licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Justin Buchel, partner, Schneider Buchel, is interviewed by Habitat magazine’s Paula Chin.

Lesson for co-op/condo board directors:

• Burning issue:  A unit-owner at a condo had a fire pit on the balcony, and people were up in arms — and scared — because there had been a recent fire at the condo. The board started legal action, but the unit-owner pushed back, saying fire pits weren’t banned in the governing documents. A cease-and-desist notice was sent explaining that the fire pit was a  nuisance due to the odors, but the unit-owner dug his heels in.
• The bylaw solution:  Instead of litigating the issue, the board decided to try to amend the bylaws. It’s a good idea to poll the community first so you know whether it’s going to pass. It can be informal, with board members going door-to-door to sound people out, or you can hold an informational meeting where you explain your proposal and ask if people will support it.
• A big margin is a must:  You need to have a much higher percentage of yes votes than what your governing documents require. If you need two-thirds of the vote, you really need 80%, because there are always people who don’t show up at meetings, and everyone who does not vote is basically a no vote. In this case, the informal poll showed  there was more than 80%, and the board won a landslide victory. So there are two takeaways: Check your bylaws to see if they need updating, and if you need to amend them, make sure you have the votes going in.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Stewart Wurtzel, partner, Tane Waterman & Wurtzel, is interviewed by Habitat magazine’s Bill Morris.

Lessons for co-op/condo board directors:

• Fat fees. If you’re thinking about going to court, don’t base the decision on whether you're going to recover legal fees, because even if you’re entitled, there are a lot of questions. The fight over legal fees often can overtake the underlying dispute, because sometimes it’s a much bigger number. 
• When winners lose. There was a case where a condo unit-owner was illegally renting his apartment on Airbnb. The board won an injunction, but when it tried to recover its legal fees the court said the condo documents did not provide for recovery of attorney’s fees in a non-monetary default situation or it wasn’t recovering common charges. The board won in court to get the conduct stopped, but it was still out about $37,000.
• Time to revise? Check your documents before you do anything. Know going into the fight what the rules are and what your chances are. If, like many co-ops and condos, you don’t have the appropriate language in your governing documents, we strongly recommend that there be a revision to the proprietary lease or bylaws. 

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Dean Roberts, Member, Norris McLaughlin, is interviewed by Habitat magazine’s Carol Ott.

Lessons for Co-op & Condo Board Directors

• Duty to maintain confidentiality. If a board member is disclosing confidential information about a shareholder and that causes some harm or damage, in theory, the board has exposure because it failed to do its duty to maintain confidentiality. Or say two directors go home after a board meeting where shareholder litigation was discussed. The directors are riding the elevator, talking about the litigation but, unfortunately, the subject of the litigation is also in the elevator. 
• Three step process for violators. A board can deal with violation of confidentiality in a three step process: censure, suspension and removal. Censure is a statement saying director X did this wrong thing. It can be internal to the board, with a memo of what they did, or it can be made public to the shareholders. Suspension means that a super majority of the board votes to suspend the violator for some period of time. Removal of a director is a very big step, because you’re overturning the shareholders’ election of a director. But if you have a director who is consistently breaching protocol removal is an option.
• Board rules. Oftentimes the disclosure is inadvertent, which is why boards have to be conscientious about the duty to maintain confidentiality. They need to know that if they improperly disclose or misuse private information there are clear consequences. 

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Christopher M. Tumulty, Partner, Fox Rothschild, is interviewed by Habitat Magazine's Bill Morris.

Lessons for Co-op & Condo Board Directors

• First line of defense. Boards need a first line of defense when shareholders or unit-owners want to renovate or combine apartments. The best way to do that is to have an alteration agreement in place before the work starts. This is important because the board has fiduciary obligations to make sure the building is operated in a safe and effective way. The problems that can arise include damages, work that's outside of the permitted scope, and insurance issues. The board’s architect should review the work of the shareholder’s architect because a big concern in these scenarios is protecting the building's common elements. All of this is addressed in a well-written alteration agreement.
• Roof deck gone wild. In a small condo building we represent, a roof deck was installed by the first purchaser of the top floor, but it wasn't done with any Department of Buildings permits or architectural plans. The work was approved by the board, but when the deck was installed, there was damage to the roof membrane and the waterproofing components, which allowed moisture to seep into the structure of the building. The board hired an architect and an engineer to locate the source of the leaks, but the unit-owner was uncooperative and refused to remove the noncompliant roof deck, so we had to take him to court. That case is still pending.
• Stick to the plan. The lesson is to have a plan in place and be engaged. Because while the board may think that an alteration is just happening inside one apartment or inside a space that's exclusively used by one unit-owner or shareholder, you have to make sure the work is done according to law and in a safe way. If it's not and there's no oversight, you could have issues down the line that would become expensive and potentially damaging to the building and other residents.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Lessons for co-op and condo board directors

Evan Richman, Partner, Fleischner Potash is interviewed by Habitat Magazine's Carol Ott.

What happened. In 2021 there was a disputed board election between two slates of candidates at a Port Chester condominium.  Right before the election, the board issued a notice to all residents in the building letting them know that this meeting was going to be held virtually. It stipulated a new requirement that in order to vote in the election, each resident or member had to first authorize the email address from which they would be sending their directed proxy. The board provided an email authorization form, which required the member to list their name, unit number and a designated email address from which they would be sending their proxy. Each member had to sign and date it, then send it back to the managing agent.

At the annual meeting. A number of proxies were submitted that had no prior email authorizations. The accountant who was overseeing the election then found that there were not enough authorized votes to constitute a quorum. Since there was no quorum, there could be no election. The board that was already in office continued for another year, and the side that had submitted the proxies challenged the election.

In court. The challengers argued that the email authorization form wasn’t reasonable and shouldn’t be permitted under the new amendments to the business corporation law, which were added during the pandemic. The court, however, said that the board was required to take steps to verify who these individuals were and that the board was required to impose safeguards. It held that this simple email authorization form was indeed a reasonable requirement and was valid under the statute, and the court dismissed the case.

Going forward. This is very significant because it appears to be the first New York case in which a court is interpreting the verification requirement under the newly enacted statutes. As co-op and condo boards now shift from in-person to virtual electronic meetings, they will need to impose some type of reasonable safeguard to eliminate fraud or misrepresentation. If a board decides to ignore this completely, it could open itself up to some type of election challenge, risk or headache down the line.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Benjamin Flavin, Partner, Braverman Greenspun, is interviewed by Habitat Magazine's Carol Ott.

Lessons for Co-op & Condo Board Directors

• The benefits. HDFC co-ops were created to provide affordable housing for people who may not otherwise be able to enter the New York City real estate market. There are also certain tax benefits that lower the cost of owning an HDFC apartment.
• The regulatory agreement. Most modern HDFCs have a regulatory agreement with New York City that outlines the financial regulations they’re subject to. I think this can be very difficult for boards because sometimes the agreements are not very clear. 
• Take flip taxes, for example. These are often determined when the HDFC was created. Many modern HDFCs have a 70/30 flip-tax ratio — 30% of the sale’s profit goes to the HDFC, and 70% goes to the shareholder. But older HDFCs have a 60/40 flip tax, where 40% of the profit goes back to the city, and the shareholder gets 60%. The HDFC is totally left out of the mix.
• Where to locate documents. Many of the documents, like the co-op’s certificate of incorporation, can be obtained from the state. Things like the deed and regulatory agreements are recorded publicly and can be found on ACRIS. And the proprietary lease, bylaws and other such documents can be found in the offering plan in their original form. 
• Keep current. One of the most important things for HDFC board members is to understand their co-op’s governing documents. They’ve changed over the years, so if you’ve read something or heard something about HDFCs you should go read your particular documents and find out if whatever you’ve heard applies to your particular co-op.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Leni Morrison Cummins, Partner, Cozen O’Connor, is interviewed by Habitat Magazine's Carol Ott.

It all starts when sponsors decide how they’re going to allocate expenses between the residential and commercial portions of the building. Real Property Law 339M gives sponsors the ability to allocate expenses based on something other than a percentage of common interest. When a sponsor is looking to market their building, they want to keep the allocation of expenses for the commercial units down. So they’ll keep an eye toward minimizing the common expenses.

Expenses go up over the years, but a board doesn’t typically have the authority to change an allocation of expense methodology without commercial unit-owner consent. And if the commercial unit-owner decides it doesn’t want to pay more, fair or not, it can refuse. 

Can a true-up fix things? It depends. A true-up is an accounting of the difference between what a board budgets for the year ahead and the actual expenses at the end of that year. The bylaws will determine whether a board can legally true-up. If they say common expenses are allocated and charged based on actual expenses, it can. But if the bylaws simply discuss creating common charges based on a budget, then a true-up isn’t necessary. In practice, though, many condos true-up even if it’s not contained in the bylaws because their accountants direct them to do so.

Just make sure your managing agent understands the prescribed allocation methodology and how it’s applied. If you do see something completely out of whack, approach the commercial unit-owners and see if they will agree to something more reasonable. If not, you’re stuck with what the bylaws say.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Peter Massa, Partner, Armstrong Teasdale, is interviewed by Habitat Magazine's Bill Morris.

• A legal landmark. The business judgment rule has been around in corporate law for a long time. The theory is that board decisions will not be second-guessed by the courts — provided they’re made in furtherance of the corporation's legitimate interest and in accordance with the recommendation of the corporation’s professionals and the governing documents.
• It’s not failsafe. The caveat here is you generally don't have business judgment rule protection if you're acting in bad faith, outside of the board's authority and against what your governing documents say, or if you’re not following the advice of your professionals.
• Case in point. I represented a condominium that had fireplaces in the apartments. When it was discovered that the chimneys weren't properly lined and fireproofed, engineers told the board it had to get this done because it’s a life-safety issue. The board was facing potential litigation on two fronts — one group didn’t want to spend the money because the fireplaces had never been a problem, and another group threatened to sue if the board did this because it was going to be a big assessment.
• What should the board do. The board should rely on the advice of the engineers. If someone sued, the board’s decision would be upheld because of the business judgment rule. While that case didn't go to litigation, that's how it would be applied. If you can show in court that you were trying to do what was best for the corporation or condominium — even if it was wrong — courts generally will grant you broad leeway.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Serving on your co-op or condo board can be a terrific experience, but it can turn into a personal nightmare if you or your board acts improperly. There are many legal protections, however, and Geoffrey Mazel, partner at Hankin & Mazel, provides an overview of what they are and the precautions you need to take. Habitat’s Emily Myers conducts the interview.

Key Takeaways for Board Directors:

 1. Basic Protections
     • Board members are protected through multiple layers including NY State statute, case law, and co-op bylaws
     • The Business Corporation Law provides indemnification for board members
    • The Business Judgment Rule offers protection when acting within authority, in good faith, and following proper procedure

 2. When Protection May Not Apply
     • Intentional wrongdoing or acts without authority
     • No-bid contracts without proper board approval
     • Discrimination against protected classes
     • Conflicts of interest that aren't properly disclosed
    • Actions that violate the proprietary lease

 3. Best Practices for Avoiding Liability
     • Hold proper board meetings with minutes and formal votes
     • Consult legal counsel before making sensitive decisions
     • Disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse when necessary
     • For purchaser rejections, ensure: 
         - Full board review and vote (not just committee approval)
         - Documentation of legitimate reasons for rejection
        - Proper minutes and record-keeping

 4. Potential Consequences
     • Personal financial liability
     • D&O insurance may defend but not indemnify in certain cases
    • Punitive damages in discrimination cases aren't covered by insurance

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

When a commercial tenant becomes problematic — whether falling behind in rent, not performing repairs or some other infraction of their lease — co-op and condo boards need to act. In this episode Moshe Bobker, partner at Tane Waterman & Wurtzel, explains what the Yellowstone Injunction is and how this critical legal tool can both protect and challenge commercial tenants in NYC buildings. Learn how this Supreme Court proceeding works, when it applies, and most importantly, how boards can strategically use it to their advantage when dealing with problematic commercial tenants.

Key highlights:

• The four essential elements required for a Yellowstone Injunction
• Why timing is crucial: tenants must file before the cure period expires
• Strategic considerations for boards choosing between non-payment proceedings and holdover cases
• Common resolution paths, from early negotiation to full litigation
• Expert tips for boards to maintain leverage in commercial tenant disputes

Whether you're currently facing commercial tenant issues or want to be prepared for future challenges, this episode provides valuable insights for protecting your building's interests. Habitat's Emily Myers conducts the interview.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

One would think it would be easy to add a family member to a co-op stock certificate, but you can’t "just add a name." For boards, it requires careful consideration of multiple factors, including transfer taxes, flip tax implications, and the financial viability of new shareholders. Matthew Goldberg, partner at Hankin & Mazel, explains how boards should evaluate cases where incoming family members lack strong finances, such as recent graduates being added to elderly relatives' shares, and outlines the legal requirements and NYC filings necessary to protect the co-op's interests. Habitat’s Emily Myers conducts the interview.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Mishandling anything to do with emotional support pets can have huge financial consequences. The Rutherford, a New York City co-op, recently learned that the hard way when a resident's noisy emotional support birds caused neighbor complaints. The board acted improperly and Attorney William McCracken, partner at Moritt Hock & Hamroff, breaks down what happened, how the board could have avoided  this costly mistake, and the lessons to be learned. Habitat's Carol Ott conducts the interview.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Living in close quarters with neighbors who blast music at 3 AM, cook pungent meals, or hoard items can turn apartment living into a nightmare. But when do everyday annoyances cross the line into legal nuisances, and how should co-op and condo boards respond? Stewart Wurtzel, member of Tane Waterman & Wurtzel, offers practical guidance on investigating complaints, understanding legal standards, and protecting both resident rights and building harmony – before matters escalate into lawsuits. Habitat’s Emily Myers conducts the interview.

Key takeaways for board directors:

* The legal threshold for "nuisance" requires persistent, egregious conduct that threatens health, safety, or comfort - not just occasional annoyances. Normal city living sounds like television at regular volume or footsteps are generally not considered unreasonable.

* Boards have a duty to investigate complaints but must balance this obligation carefully. Simply accepting complaints at face value and sending warning letters without investigation can create unnecessary conflicts between residents.

* Documentation is crucial - encourage complainants to maintain detailed logs of disturbances, including timing, frequency, and duration. Multiple complaints from different residents typically carry more weight than isolated complaints.

* When pursuing legal action, boards must ensure complaining residents are willing to testify in court. Without their cooperation, the board risks losing the case and potentially being responsible for the defendant's legal fees.

* Different remedies exist for co-ops versus condos: co-ops can pursue eviction proceedings, while condos must seek injunctive relief through Supreme Court. However, the underlying analysis of what constitutes a nuisance remains largely the same.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Enforcing pet policies in co-ops and condos can feel like walking through a legal minefield. From tight enforcement deadlines to complex accommodations for service and emotional support animals, board directors face high-stakes decisions that could lead to costly litigation if mishandled.

Attorney Kenneth Finger, a member of the law firm Finger & Finger, offers board directors essential insights into navigating the complex intersection of pet policies and legal requirements in New York co-ops and condos. The conversation reveals critical timing requirements for enforcing no-pet policies and explores the nuanced landscape of service animals and emotional support animals (ESAs). Habitat's Emily Myers conducts the interview.

Key takeaways for board directors:

* The 90-day rule is absolute: Boards must take court action within 90 days of discovering an unauthorized pet, or they permanently waive their right to enforce the no-pet policy for that animal's lifetime. 

* Service animals vs. ESAs have different standards: While service dogs (which must be specially trained) cannot be refused, emotional support animals require more documentation but can be any species. However, boards cannot restrict size or breed in either case.

* Documentation requirements for ESAs should be thorough: Boards can request vaccination records, licensing, and legitimate medical documentation. They can challenge questionable medical certifications but should be prepared for potential human rights complaints.

* Enforcement carries financial risks: Challenging ESA requests can lead to expensive litigation, insurance complications, and potential damages if the board loses. Boards must carefully weigh these costs against enforcement benefits.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Tracy Peterson, a partner at the law firm Braverman Greenspun, joins Habitat's Paula Chin for an essential discussion on how co-op and condo boards should handle resident requests for information and documents about fellow residents. Peterson draws from her extensive experience to explain when boards must share information, what they can protect, and how to avoid unnecessary litigation.

Board directors will gain practical insights into:

* The broad rights shareholders and unit owners have to access building records and documents, particularly during election seasons when candidates need to communicate with fellow residents
* How boards can protect sensitive information by using confidentiality agreements, which most requesting parties are willing to sign
* Why boards should proactively survey residents annually about their preferences for sharing contact information, creating clear guidelines before requests arise
* The importance of the "good faith" requirement - boards can deny requests that appear to be fishing expeditions without specific purposes, but should consult counsel before doing so

Peterson emphasizes that boards often make the mistake of immediately denying information requests, which can create adversarial relationships and lead to lawsuits. Instead, she recommends consulting with legal counsel to understand what must be shared under the Business Corporation Law, which applies to both co-ops and condos. With proper guidance and the strategic use of confidentiality agreements, boards can maintain transparency while protecting resident privacy.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

In this episode of Legal Talk, Jennifer Stewart, a partner at the law firm Smith Buss and Jacobs, explains to Habitat's Emily Myers how critical the importance of understanding statutes of limitations for co-op and condo board directors is. The discussion reveals how timing can make or break a board's ability to pursue legal claims or defend against them.

Stewart emphasizes that proactive planning and early legal consultation are essential for protecting a building's interests. Through real-world examples, she illustrates how different types of claims have varying time limits – from one-year warranty claims to six-year breach of contract windows. She shares particularly sobering stories of boards who waited too long to act, leading to costly and complicated legal battles that could have been avoided with earlier intervention.

Key takeaways for board directors:

* Different claims have different deadlines: Construction defects might involve multiple time limits – one year for warranties, three years for professional malpractice, and six years for breach of contract claims.

* Corporate action challenges (like disputed elections or new house rules) have a surprisingly short four-month statute of limitations for shareholders or unit owners to file suit.

* While there are creative legal strategies to extend deadlines (like tolling or fraud claims), these approaches are more expensive and complex than acting within the original time frame.

* A quick consultation with counsel when issues first arise – even before deciding to pursue legal action – helps boards understand their timeline for making decisions and preserving their rights.

Stewart's practical advice boils down to a simple principle: when in doubt about potential claims, have a brief conversation with counsel early on. This small step can save boards significant headaches and legal expenses down the road.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

Navigating building violations can be tricky for co-op and condo boards, especially when it comes to determining responsibility for corrections. In this enlightening discussion with attorney Brandon James of Borah Goldstein, board directors will learn crucial guidelines for managing violations effectively and avoiding costly mistakes. Habitat's Paula Chin conducts the interview. 

James breaks down the fundamental "rule of thumb" - unit owners and shareholders are typically responsible for conditions inside their apartments, while boards handle common area issues. However, there are important exceptions, such as lead paint violations and problems stemming from common area issues like facade leaks causing interior mold.

Key takeaways:
• Even when violations are the unit owner's responsibility, notices typically go to the building first - making it critical for boards to promptly notify and follow up with residents responsible for corrections

• Failing to monitor and address violations can have severe consequences, including massive financial penalties, difficulty refinancing, and damage to the building's reputation - one example cited showed a 25-unit building that accumulated over $300,000 in violation penalties

• During refinancing, most lenders require buildings to cure outstanding violations within six months of closing, putting boards under pressure to resolve backlogged issues quickly

• Boards can generally recover violation-related costs from responsible unit owners through indemnification clauses, but this becomes much more difficult if too much time passes between the violation and enforcement

The episode emphasizes that proactive monitoring and prompt attention to violations, even minor ones, is essential for maintaining both building safety and financial health. Letting violations accumulate can create a snowball effect that impacts everything from property values to residents' quality of life.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!

Send us a text

In this informative Legal Talk episode, attorney Michael Savino of Braverman Greenspun shares with Habitat's Paula Chin essential guidance for co-op and condo board directors dealing with construction defects in new buildings. The conversation provides a clear roadmap for boards to protect their interests when issues arise after a sponsor hands over control.

Savino explains that while minor problems can often be addressed through punch lists, major defects—particularly in building systems like plumbing and facades—require swift and methodical action. He emphasizes that these issues can be both costly and potentially dangerous to residents and passersby if left unaddressed.

Key takeaways for board directors:

• Act quickly and document everything: Survey unit owners about problems, save all communications, and notify the sponsor early, as there's a six-year statute of limitations from the first unit sale to file claims.

• Hire the right experts: Engage an appropriately sized engineering or architectural firm to conduct a thorough building assessment and provide detailed documentation of all defects—this initial investment will prove valuable in negotiations or litigation.

• Understand your options: Before pursuing litigation, explore whether the sponsor will cooperate through direct negotiation or a tolling agreement. If litigation becomes necessary, ensure the sponsor entity has assets to pay for repairs.

• Consider costs carefully: While violation fines and repair costs may be recoverable, legal fees typically aren't unless specifically provided for in the offering plan. Statutory interest of 9% can accrue on claims during litigation.

The episode underscores that proper due diligence and documentation are crucial for boards to successfully address construction defects and protect their buildings' long-term interests.

The business of running a building is demanding work that requires making endless decisions — some that can quickly lead your board into a quagmire of legal difficulties. Legal Talk interviews New York's leading co-op/condo attorneys to find solutions, and get some guidance, on these challenges. For more co-op and condo insights, sign up to receive Habitat's free newsletters or become a Habitat subscriber today!