Foreclosure litigation involves much more than simply enforcing a contract. Follow this top 10 checklist when representing private lenders to successfully navigate the nuances of foreclosure practice.

Read the full article by Andrew Lieb, Esq. and Jay Sheryll, Esq. here. 

2017 is all about change. With a new Republican administration in the White House and a Republican Congress we will experience many changes in statutes, regulations and public policy throughout 2017, which will affect real estate transactions, litigation and our counsel to our clients related thereto. Our clients will have changed perspective and ever-changing needs. While not all change is good, it’s healthy to accept change and embrace it, regardless of one’s personal politics.

As an attorney, change is an opportunity, and those of us who best navigate change will emerge as the leaders of our profession as new laws require new legal leaders. Yet, to leverage change we must first have a firm grasp of the current state of the law. This special section in The Suffolk Lawyer delves into what is, to what will be in real estate law. We address client management, complex niche transactions, litigation incident to transactions, solutions to the foreclosure crisis and we even shed some light on the new administration as it relates to housing.

In this edition Kenneth J. Landau, Esq. sets the tone by giving us a new take on the KISS Principle as it relates to real estate transactions in his article “Give Your Real Estate Clients (A) K.I.S.S.” Then, the team of Jordan Fensterman, Esq., Howard Fensterman, Esq., and Andrew Kasman, Esq. provides instruction to the practitioner on the crossroads of health law and real estate in “Nursing Home Transactions.” Thereafter, Dennis Valet, Esq. sheds some light on claims against real estate brokers that typically result from a case of buyer’s remorse in “Caveat Emptor and Why You Shouldn’t Sue That Real Estate Broker.” Next, past Real Property Committee Chair Irwin Izen, Esq. educates the bar on a recently enacted statute that charges the New York Mortgage Agency to both create and administer the New York Community Restoration Fund in “More Help for Distressed Homeowners.” Lastly, Sabine Franco, Esq. sheds some light on the nominated HUD Secretary, Ben Carson, in “Expectations for HUD.”

These articles are designed to ground us, educate us and inspire us. They are the foundation of what is today because without learning about today we cannot be prepared to leverage tomorrow. In my fifth year as the Special Section Editor for Real Property, I need to thank our Editor-in-Chief, Laura Lane, who has made this all possible. Thank you to Ms. Lane and to all our writers. I hope that you enjoy this edition.   Andrew Lieb, Esq. 

Click here for the full edition in The Suffolk Lawyer 

When the discovery of a latent defect in a newly purchased home triggers a severe case of buyer’s remorse, the real estate brokers involved in the transaction often find themselves in the crosshairs. The erroneous expectation is that these licensed professionals hired for the purpose of bringing two parties together in a meeting of the minds are the guarantors of a problem-free transaction. In reality, a real estate broker’s liability is limited to the duties owed to the complaining party. Some of these duties are derived from general common law negligence and agency principles, while others are specific to real estate brokers by way of statutes, regulations and administrative decisions. Because consumers tend to purchase or rent a home only a handful of times in their life, their familiarity with the rules governing these agency relationships is often lacking. 

So, when is it really your real estate broker’s fault? 

Read the full article by Dennis Valet, Esq. in published in The Suffolk Lawyer Here. 

Landlords cannot sue a guarantor in a Summary Proceeding because there is “no relationship of landlord and tenant … [where guarantor] was not a primary or joint obligor but assumed a secondary liability which accrued only upon default by the principal.” See Marburt Holding Corp. v. Picto Corp.,(1st Dept., 1958). Therefore, to enforce a guarantee, a landlord must pursue a Plenary Action against the guarantor following the conclusion of the Summary Proceeding. Nonetheless, landlords need not fret about the difficulty and cost incident to instituting a Plenary Action against a guarantor because landlords can proceed pursuant to CPLR §3213 and utilize the Doctrine of Collateral Estoppel in order to avoid the protracted litigation that is typical of a Plenary Action.


Read the full article by Andrew Lieb, Esq. published in The Suffolk Lawyer here. 

In Plotch v. Citibank, decided on May 10, 2016, the Court of Appeals clarified issues of lien priority between a consolidated mortgage and a condominium’s common charge lien pursuant to RPL §399-z. Specifically, the court addressed whether the exception to a common charge lien’s priority for “all sums unpaid on a first mortgage of record,” as set forth in RPL §399-z, applies to a consolidated mortgage recorded prior to the recordation of such common charge lien. The court held that a consolidated mortgage constitutes only one first mortgage of record for purposes of lien priority under the Condominium Act. However, the court limited its holding by emphasizing that the consolidated mortgage was recorded prior to the common charge lien, and therefore the court expounded that “[t]he consolidation agreement […] did not interfere with any rights of the condominium board.” In such, it is envisioned that a subsequently recorded consolidation agreement to a common charge lien will not be given first lien priority pursuant to RPL §399-z.

Read the full article, published in The Suffolk Lawyer by Andrew Lieb, Esq. Here. 

Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law an amendment to CPLR Rule 3408, which, at new subsection (m) thereof, effectively eliminates defaults in foreclosure actions as currently understood. Interestingly, the amendment is made to CPLR Rule 3408, which is the CPLR Rule titled “Mandatory settlement conference in residential foreclosure actions,” and not to CPLR Rule 320, which is the CPLR Rule titled “ Defendant’s appearance,” or to CPLR Rule 5015, which is the CPLR Rule titled “Relief from judgment or order,” or to CPLR §3012(d), which is the CPLR subsection titled “Extension of time to appear or plead.” This choice of placement raises questions about how the amendment will be effective in practice. Further questions are raised because the amendment includes superfluous language in expressly stating that the “default shall be deemed vacated” while also referencing the “reasonable excuse” language from both CPLR Rule 5015 and CPLR §3012(d). Still further, the new subsection does not eliminate the need for a defendant to formally answer, but only extends the time to answer, which presumptively will remain a problem for a foreclosure defendant to accomplish at a later date. These question marks need to be ironed out by practitioners and the courts after new subsection (m)’s effective date of December 20, 2016.

Read the full article published in The Suffolk Lawyer by Andrew Lieb, Esq. and Jay Sheryll, Esq. here. 

On January 1, 2016 the amended Article 32 of the Labor Law became effective thereby making it “unlawful for any person to engage, advertise or hold themselves out as a mold assessor, remediation contractor, or abatement worker unless they have a valid mold license, issued by the commissioner, for the type of work they will be performing. Individuals who do so may be subject to a civil penalty.”

Read the full article by Andrew Lieb, Esq. in the Suffolk Lawyer.

The Court of Appeals in Beltz v. City of Yonkers effectively established the Trivial Defect Doctrine in 1895, a staple in the modern defense attorney’s playbook. Therein, the court recognized that no walkway could be kept so perfectly safe so as to preclude the possibility of an accident and accordingly held that “when … the defect is so slight that no careful or prudent man would reasonably anticipate any danger from its existence … the question of defendant’s responsibility is one of law.” Perhaps shocking to a modern practitioner, the Beltz court found that a two and a half inch deep, 26 inch long and seven inch wide depression in a sidewalk was not an actionable defect. Ever since, New York courts have struggled to define when a defect in a walkway is actionable.

Flat fee MLS is a trend where a homeowner can pay a small fee (typically around $300), to list their For Sale By Owner home (referred to herein as “FSBO”), on the Multiple Listing Service (referred to herein as “MLS”). As a result, the homeowner can enjoy the best of both worlds in avoiding an approximate 4 to 6 percent commission, while nonetheless exposing their property to all of the clients and customers of licensed real estate brokers/brokerage firms throughout the region. However, the FSBO homeowner cannot directly place their home on the MLS on Long Island, but instead must pay a flat fee MLS vendor, who is also a real estate broker/brokerage firm (referred to herein as “MLS vendor”) for the privilege of using the MLS because only licensees of the service can list on the MLS.

Read the full article, written by Andrew Lieb, Esq. published in The Suffolk Lawyer. 

Jessica Vogele, the number one ranked law student in the 2L class at Touro Law Center who is also a Law Clerk at Lieb at Law, P.C. addresses the most hot-button issue on Long Island today by delving into the zoning of medical marijuana facilities within her article published in The Suffolk Lawyer.

In July 2015, the New York State Department of Health licensed five companies to manufacture and sell medical marijuana in compliance with the Compassionate Care Act of 2014. Although no manufacturing plants will be located on Long Island, there are plans to build two dispensaries – one in Nassau County and the other in Suffolk County. The proposed site for Suffolk County is located in the Town of Riverhead and has met considerable resistance from town residents due to its proximity to a high school and the risks of increased violent crime and traffic generally associated with medical marijuana dispensaries. This backlash against the proposed site has prompted the Village of Islandia to preemptively amend its zoning ordinance in order to ensure that no dispensaries will be placed
within the village’s boundaries in the future.

Income producing real estate in Suffolk County is the backbone of our local economy. We have our weekend warriors who rent out their second homes, merchants who operate and lease our mixed use downtowns, REITs, public companies and national brands who manage our industrial parks and shopping centers, hospitals and their doctors, lawyers, architects and accountants who inhabit our professional spaces and every other category of property owners imaginable. Yet, the business of owning and/or managing an income producing property is truly a business, and should not be thought of as a passive investment afterthought. It’s a business that requires a lawyer to serve as counselor, negotiator, scrivener and litigator. In fact, best in class legal services can transform a poor real estate investor into the next great American tycoon.

In this issue of The Suffolk Lawyer, we not only focus on Real Property, but also focus on the business of profiting from real property with all of its associated risks and blue ocean opportunities. Regardless of your individual legal practice focus, knowing the basic pitfalls of real estate ownership is a necessary knowledgebase for every Suffolk County attorney. 

In this edition Dennis Valet, Esq. discusses the need to preemptively mitigate leasing risks in “Reasons to Involve an Attorney in the Rental of an Accessory Apartment,” and Alicia Menechino, Esq. addresses the need to respect the judicial process for evictions in her article, “Self-Help: Vigilante Justice or Legal Re-Entry?” Next, Jordan Fensterman, Esq. addresses the unique risks inherent with renting medical space in his article, “Leasing Medical Office Space in New York.” 

Attorneys don't need a real estate brokerage license to earn a commission. Yet, they can obtain a license by simply paying a fee without even taking the requisite 120 hour class or passing the exam. 

So, why should an attorney bother becoming licensed as a broker? The reason is that it both helps the attorney's clients to gain access to property and it also secures the attorney's ability to split a brokerage commission pursuant to a cooperative brokerage agreement.

Full article in The Suffolk Lawyer, written by Andrew Lieb, Esq. here. 

Learn about real estate brokers' duty to disclose to those that they do not represent. Recent case creates more questions than it answers.

Full article in The Suffolk Lawyer, written by Andrew Lieb, Esq. here. 

The Court of Appeals recently held that a single-family home is not “owner-occupied” for purposes of qualification in a Small Claims Assessment Review (SCAR) when such home is occupied “by an owner’s relative but not by the owner” “during the relevant tax period.” In so ruling, the court limited SCAR proceedings’ availability to fact-patterns that clearly establish occupancy by the owner.

Read Andrew Lieb's full article published in The Suffolk Lawyer.

SCAR Proceeding Owner-Occupancy Requirement

Check out Andrew Lieb's latest article published in The Suffolk Lawyer.

Andrew Lieb's latest article has been published in The Suffolk Lawyer.

In January 2015, a new Human Rights law went into effect in Suffolk County, to wit: Local Law No. 25- 2014. While the Suffolk County Human Rights Law (hereinafter “SCHRL”) is similar to the Federal Fair Housing Act and the New York State’s Human Rights Law, the SCHRL now adds the protected class of “lawful source of income” to prohibited housing discrimination throughout the county; a protected class that does not exist in either the federal or state law.

To read the full article, click here.

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's June 26 same-sex marriage decisions, pressure has increased to expand protections under federal, state and local legislation regarding sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression in the context of employment and housing. In the employment area, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions ("HELP") Committee has approved a bill, ENDA (the Employment Non-Discrimination Act), that would prohibit employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Learn more about employment and housing regulations and see the full published article here

Guess what? If you are trying to evict a family member and you resort to a summary proceeding, it will likely be dismissed. Instead, you will end up in a prolonged ejectment proceeding in Supreme Court or in the appropriate matrimonial / family part depending on your precise circumstances. This jurisdictional result is
because Family Member Evictions are typically not available in a summary proceeding. However, should an unrelated paramour be considered a family member after all?

See the full published article here...