“As we welcome the new year, Rosenberg & Estis is ready to tackle the challenges ahead with strength and expertise. We are incredibly proud of our legal team and staff for their dedication and accomplishments, which ensure we continue delivering exceptional service to our clients.
This year holds special significance as we prepare to celebrate Rosenberg & Estis’ 50th anniversary, a testament to five decades of unwavering commitment to our clients and the real estate industry. Our feature story highlights key changes for commercial and apartment building owners as New York City, always seeking tax revenue growth, revamps its tax lien law and gears up for the next lien sale in May 2025. Additionally, this past year, we formed two new groups, The New York City Development Group and Distressed Real Estate Group, to provide clients with solutions for a rapidly evolving real estate landscape.
The real estate industry has faced significant uncertainty, but Rosenberg & Estis has been and will continue to be a thought partner, assisting in the navigation of the road ahead. Here’s to a strong start to 2025!
Michael E. Lefkowitz Managing Member
Contents
Rosenberg & Estis Featured in the January 2025 edtion of Mann Report
We are incredibly thankful for our clients, attorneys and staff and for their contributions in helping to make R&E New York’s PREMIER real estate law firm.
50 Years of Rosenberg & Estis
As R&E celebrates five decades of shaping New York City’s skyline, the firm remains dedicated to excellence and innovation. We highlight some of the firm’s recent initiatives to celebrate this significant milestone.
NYC’s 2025 Tax Lien Sale: Key Points for Commercial and Apartment Building Owners
As New York City revamps its tax lien law and gears up for the next lien sale in May 2025, owners of commercial properties, larger apartment buildings, and other non-owner-occupied properties should remain vigilant. While the core policy shift leans heavily toward protecting small homeowner-occupants, these changes still matter for larger entities that need to stay current and strategic about property taxes—especially if you’re contesting assessed values through tax certiorari proceedings.
Rosenberg & Estis Blog
Rosenberg & Estis, P.C.’s blog section continues to serve as a platform which provides crucial and timely updates to our valued clients and industry colleagues.
Podcast: Inside R&E
Inside R&E is a podcast hosted by R&E and New York City’s leading real estate attorneys who discuss current issues facing developers, owners and operators in the industry.
Recent Publications
Published works by R&E attorneys. As seen in the New York Law Journal.
Press Releases
Throughout this recent quarter, R&E’s seasoned attorneys were victorious at the Appellate Division, First Department, and secured a crucial rezoning in Brooklyn and continued groundbreaking transactional representation at One World Trade Center.
Recent Events
As New York City’s premier real estate law firm, R&E attorneys were invited as expert speakers on in-person panels as well as several webinars.
Rosenberg & Estis Featured in the January 2025 edition of Mann Report
“
As the industry has changed, so has R&E, growing in size and scope to offer a comprehensive suite of services for all industry members. Now, as the firm celebrates its 50th anniversary, R&E stands as the city’s leading full-service real estate law firm, offering superior services in every aspect of real estate, while remaining the city’s foremost legal expert on the dynamics of the commercial market.
50 Years of Rosenberg & Estis
As R&E celebrates five decades of shaping New York City’s skyline, the firm remains dedicated to excellence and innovation. We highlight some of the firm’s recent initiatives to celebrate this significant milestone.
Exclusive Partnership with Traded NY
As of December 2024, R&E is Traded NY’s exclusive legal content partner. The partnership started with a blog by R&E Counsel David J. Rosenberg titled “The City of Yes: 5 Numbers Every NYC Landlord Needs to Know”. A second blog, by R&E Member Cori A. Rosen, was released on December 30, 2024 titled “The Fair Chance for Housing Act: What NYC Landlords Need to Know for 2025”. This was followed by the latest blog by R&E Member Daniel M. Bernstein titled “Critical Tax Incentives for NYC Residential Development in 2025 and Beyond: 485-x, 467-m, and 421-a,” released on January 13.
R&E’s 50th Anniversary Social Media Campaign
The firm launched a 50th Anniversary campaign across social media platforms, beginning October 2024.
Advertising in Mann Report and The Real Deal
R&E kicked off a commemorative 10-month advertising campaign in the Mann Report starting November 2024. The magazine’s latest edition included a front-page feature and a four-page article about the firm.
The firm was featured in The Real Deal’s 2024 list of top NYC real estate law firms. In addition, the firm also secured celebratory advertising to highlight firm achievements.
As seen in: THE REAL DEAL, OCTOBER 2024
The R&E Client Experience
“
The Durst Organization has relied on the advice, knowledge, and professionalism of Rosenberg & Estis for four decades, starting with the development of 114 West 47th Street to the subsequent complicated negotiations for the successful developments of One Five One West 42nd Street, One Bryant Park, and One World Trade Center.
– Douglas Durst CHAIRMAN
THE DURST ORGANIZATION
“
Rosenberg & Estis is an integral partner to The Durst Organization. There have been projects in which R&E helped us pioneer paths to objectives with no precedent. The only tools available were excellent judgment and creativity. R&E has those qualifications and more.
– Jody Durst PRESIDENT THE DURST ORGANIZATION
“
In 2018 our journey with Rosenberg & Estis began in a guardianship courtroom. It is perhaps the only time in New York history that five attorneys and a judge all agreed on anything. They all agreed that Rosenberg & Estis, specifically Luise Barrack, were the best attorneys to hire. My wife and I were paying the bills, and the unknown future costs created fear.
To quote Michael Bloomberg’s mother, “Everyone knows how much something costs, but few people know the value”. Initially I knew the hourly cost of Luise Barrack and her team, Moshe Nachum and Erica Wells, but I didn’t understand the value. It didn’t take long for my sleepless nights to be converted into a comfortable peace of mind knowing that we had an experienced, hard-working, bright team working on our behalf. They treated us like family and their only clients. They provided us with honest solutions and strategies for dealing with challenging situations. They didn’t cost us money; they made us money. They took the money fear out of the equation and replaced it with friendship.
We will be forever indebted to Luise, Moshe and Erica.
– Ed & Holly Kuykendall TREE
I have been working with Rosenberg & Estis for eight years and have been extremely pleased with the level of service. Not only are the attorneys skilled and experienced, but they are also a pleasure to work with. R&E helped us develop form transaction documents several years ago and thus have a thorough understanding of the negotiating points that are important to us. This makes closing deals significantly smoother as I am confident R&E will flag the appropriate issues as they come up. We’ve closed extremely complicated and fast paced transactions using the R&E team as counsel, and they’ve been able to keep everything organized and on schedule. Knowing I can pick up the phone and have R&E engaged within a matter of minutes, no matter the assignment, adds a tremendous amount of value. We are extremely appreciative of the long term relationship and congratulate R&E on their 50th Anniversary.
– Robert Rothschild SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT
INTERVEST CAPITAL PARTNERS
“
I have had the pleasure of working with Rosenberg & Estis for the past four years. Our company runs a lean operation. As such, we rely immensely on trusted advisors to help mitigate risk and maximize value for our investments. In this capacity, R&E has exceeded expectations. From challenging tenant negotiations to complicated transactions, we receive attentive service, thoughtful strategy and resourceful solutions across members of their team. R&E’s competitive advantage is that it meaningfully participates in the discussion as opposed to merely mapping out the decision tree. We view Brett Theis and the overall R&E team as an extension of our company and exclusively use them for our business needs in New York City. We congratulate R&E on their 50th anniversary and look forward to a continued successful partnership in the years to come.
– Valon Hidra HEAD OF
US
ASSET MANAGEMENT | INVESTMENTS, NORTH AMERICA AFIAA U.S. INVESTMENT, INC.
The YMCA of Greater New York extends its sincere congratulations to Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. on its 50th anniversary celebration.
Luise Barrack has been a dedicated partner for our organization. Her relationship with the Y began in the late 1970s as a law student. Luise engaged in property research on behalf of the Y, a project that would launch a decades-long relationship.
At Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., Luise has been an invaluable champion for the Y. She has committed countless hours to promote and enhance our organization, which has a reach to all five boroughs. The Y values our professional relationship with Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. and we look forward to many years of collaboration and partnership.
– Sharon Greenberger PRESIDENT & CEO
YMCA OF GREATER NEW YORK
“
I have had a working relationship and friendship with Mike Lefkowitz for approximately 25 years.
The thing that differentiates Mike from others is his unique experience relating to growing up in a family real estate business. His views not only stem from a legal perspective but from an ownership operator perspective which is sensible and pragmatic when solving issues that arise.
Mike has always conducted himself in the highest of standards, always with integrity. He is an incredibly quick study, understanding whatever agenda we set out to accomplish and trust him implicitly.
– Len Novick PRINCIPAL
CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC
SARATOGA
“I believe that the hallmark of any good law firm is understanding the client’s needs while delivering quality legal representation with clear communications in a timely fashion, in order to meet those needs. As the general manager of various cooperative corporations for over three decades, I have been working with R&E (and more specifically, Bradley Silverbush) for longer than I can remember. During that time, the firm has successfully represented the co-ops I have managed in all venues, from Housing to Federal Court. R&E’s team of attorneys reflect integrity and dedication to their clients; they possess the specialized knowledge and experience that have provided the tools by which they consistently obtain optimum results. I am pleased to say that the quality of legal services provided by R&E has been exceptional, consistent, reliable, and dependable.
– Shulie Wollman VICE PRESIDENT/GENERAL MANAGER
EAST RIVER HOUSING CORPORATION
NYC’s 2025 Tax Lien Sale: Key Points for Commercial and Apartment Building Owners
December 11, 2024
By Benjamin M. Williams
Benjamin M. Williams Member
As New York City revamps its tax lien law and gears up for the next lien sale in May 2025, owners of commercial properties, larger apartment buildings, and other non-owner-occupied properties should remain vigilant. While the core policy shift leans heavily toward protecting small homeowner-occupants, these changes still matter for larger entities that need to stay current and strategic about property taxes—especially if you’re contesting assessed values through tax certiorari proceedings.
Important Dates and Effective Dates
Local Law 82 of 2024, which substantially amended the City’s tax lien procedures, became law on July 30, 2024. Most provisions took effect 90 days later—around late October 2024—though certain requirements may be phased in after 180 days. This timeline means the reformed lien sale rules and enhanced outreach efforts will be firmly in place by early 2025, well before the scheduled lien sale in May 2025.
When and Why Liens Can Be Sold
Under the updated rules, the length of time that charges must be overdue before the City can sell a lien varies by property type. For commercial properties and larger residential buildings that do not qualify as HDFC rentals or small mixed-use buildings, the threshold remains 1 year of overdue charges. Owners should note:
• Commercial Properties, Larger Residential Rentals, Other Vacant Land: 1 year overdue
• HDFC Rentals: 2 years overdue
• Residential Cooperatives, Developable Class 1 Vacant Land, Small Store/Office with 1–2 Apartments Above: 3 years overdue
This timeframe hasn’t significantly
changed from prior lien sale rules for larger commercial and non-HDFC rental properties. The biggest shifts in the new law target homeowner-occupied properties, offering them more time and special payment or deferral options. Commercial owners, by contrast, will continue largely under the previous regime—delinquencies after one year can still trigger a lien sale.
No Special Protections for Owners Contesting Their Assessed Values
A critical point for those engaged in tax certiorari (the process of challenging the assessed value to reduce real property taxes) is that a pending challenge does not prevent a lien from being sold. Even if you believe the assessment or other charges are incorrect and have a tax certiorari case pending, the City may still sell the lien if the overdue charges hit the time threshold.
This means you must either pay the outstanding charges or enter into an installment agreement to avoid the lien sale. If your certiorari proceeding ultimately succeeds and you secure a reduction, you will be entitled to a refund or a credit—but you must first ensure the lien isn’t sold. Waiting for a contested assessment result without paying risks much bigger headaches down the line.
Installment Agreements: A Practical (But Not Interest-Reducing) Tool
If paying the overdue charges outright before the February 2025 90-day list publication isn’t feasible, consider entering into an installment agreement with the Department of Finance. While such agreements can prevent your property from appearing on the lien sale list, they do not reduce the interest rate. You’ll continue to incur interest, but at least you’ll avoid the immediate threat of a lien sale in May 2025.
New provisions require the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) to inspect certain repeatedly delinquent multi-family properties before the lien sale. Although HPD’s attention is primarily geared toward safeguarding tenant conditions in distressed buildings, larger rental buildings that frequently show up on lien lists may now face closer scrutiny. This can mean: More inspections for code compliance, building maintenance, and tenant protection measures.
Potentially higher costs or mandated repairs if deficiencies are found.
Added pressure to ensure timely tax payments to avoid drawing HPD’s focus and incurring further regulatory action.
Have the Rules for Commercial Properties Changed Significantly?
For commercial and larger residential rental properties, the fundamental lien sale triggers and timelines remain largely the same as in previous iterations of the law. The main changes primarily benefit smaller, owner-occupied homes and condos, adding special payment and deferral options those owners can use to stave off lien sales. Commercial owners receive none of these new “breaks.”
What has changed is the City’s overall enforcement posture, outreach, and transparency. You can expect:
• More rigorous and timely notices before the lien sale.
• Heightened emphasis on ensuring you’re aware of delinquencies well in advance.
• More public reporting on properties approaching lien sale status, meaning more scrutiny on repeated offenders.
Action Items for Commercial Owners and Managers
• Review Tax Bills and Deadlines: Check if you have outstanding charges that exceed 1 year. If so, settle them before February 2025 or seek an installment agreement.
• Don’t Rely on Pending Certiorari: Even if you’re confident you’ll win a tax reduction, pay now to avoid the lien sale and seek a refund later.
• Monitor HPD Inspections: If your building has a history of chronic delinquency, expect closer HPD attention. Proper maintenance and code compliance are more critical than ever.
• Stay Informed: As the City refines and updates its approach, keep tabs on any rule changes. Talk to your property tax attorney, especially if you’re navigating certiorari cases or uncertain about your installment agreement options.
Conclusion
While the new tax lien law’s headline changes focus on protecting small homeowners, commercial property owners, cooperative boards, and managers of larger buildings must not become complacent. Your underlying rules—1 year overdue equals lien sale risk—remain intact. Pending assessment challenges won’t shield you. And with the law now effective, the City’s oversight and enforcement are only intensifying. Proactive tax management and strategic installment agreements (if needed) remain your best tools to keep your property off the lien sale list and out of regulatory crosshairs.
ROSENBERG & ESTIS BLOG
Rosenberg & Estis, P.C.’s blog section continues to serve as a platform which provides crucial and timely updates to our valued clients and industry colleagues.
Daniel M. Bernstein Member, Head of Tax Incentives & Affordable Housing Department
New J-51 Property Tax Abatement Program
The bill was signed into law on December 18, 2024. This J-51 program provides potential property tax savings for eligible buildings in New York City that meet certain requirements.
Navigating NYC’s New 485-x Program: Challenges and Opportunities for Developers
As NYC residential developers evaluate the new 485-x tax incentive program (replacement for the expired 421-a tax incentive program) they have raised concerns that the burdensome construction wage requirements may deter the development of “very large rental projects” (150 or more units) in key areas like Manhattan south of 96th St., and parts of Brooklyn and Queens.
New Opportunities in NYC Housing: The 421-a Completion Deadline Extension
The 421-a Completion extension (June 15, 2031 for eligible projects) has made construction of tens of thousands of new apartments economically viable. It is expected that such sites can now obtain financing and resume construction.
To read more, visit the Tax Incentives & Affordable Housing Blog on the Rosenberg & Estis website.
Benjamin M. Williams Member, Head of Property Tax Department
How Savvy Investors Can Spot Distressed Properties Before NYC’s 2025 Tax Lien Sale
As New York City prepares for its May 2025 tax lien sale, property owners with overdue taxes face growing financial pressure.
NYC’s Capital Debt and Real Estate Valuation (FY2025)
The NYC Comptroller’s Annual Report on Capital Debt and Obligations for Fiscal Year 2025 provides an important update on the city’s debt management and its implications for property owners.
Property Tax Error Correction Rules and Their Proposed Changes
As stakeholders in the NYC real estate community, it’s essential to understand these proposed changes, their potential impact on property owners, and the broader implications for fairness and equity in our property tax system.
To read more, visit the NYC Property Tax Blog on the Rosenberg & Estis website.
PODCAST: INSIDE R&E
Inside R&E is a podcast hosted by R&E and New York City’s leading real estate attorneys who discuss current issues facing developers, owners and operators in the industry.
Inside R&E is the perfect way to keep yourself up-to-date on the New York real estate industry. Inside R&E is available to stream on all major platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music and Google Podcasts. Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcast.
RECENT EPISODES
Deeds in Lieu of Foreclosure
Featuring Richard Y. Im
This episode of Inside R&E, moderated by Dave Lorenzo, Founder of Exit Success Lab, features Richard Y. Im, a Member in R&E’s Litigation Department, and Jason C. Bergman, Vice President & Senior Underwriting Counsel at Benchmark Title Agency LLC. The attorneys share valuable insights on Deed-in-Lieu and its pros and cons for borrowers as well as lenders. They also discuss the various risks and considerations associated with Deeds-in-Lieu.
Everything you need to know about Local Law 152
Featuring Justin S. Weitzman
In this episode of Inside R&E, Justin S. Weitzman, a Counsel in the firm’s Litigation Department, invites Bill Weidner, Managing Member at KeepMyGas, to share valuable insights, statistics and more regarding the 1st 4-year cycle of LL152 and what law firms, building owners and property managers can expect in cycle 2 from 2024 to 2027.
To listen to previously recorded podcasts, please visit the Podcast page, under “News & Events” on the Rosenberg & Estis website, or go to the Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. YouTube channel (@rosenbergestis).
RECENT PUBLICATIONS
Published works by R&E attorneys.
As seen in the New York Law Journal.
Gary M. Rosenberg Member
Are New York City Housing Providers Ready for the Fair Chance for Housing Act?
New York Law Journal– December 3, 2024
By Gary M. Rosenberg and Cori A. Rosen
In recent years, housing discrimination claims in New York City and State have predominantly involved alleged discrimination on the basis of disability, age, citizenship status, color, creed, familial status, gender, lawful occupation, lawful source of income, marital status, national origin, partnership status, race, religion, sexual orientation, and status as a veteran or victim of domestic violence (see NYC Admin Code. §8-107[5] the “City Human Rights Law,” Title 8 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, see also, Executive Law Art. 15, the “SHRL,” and the Fair Housing Act, 42 USC 42 U.S.C.A. §3601, et. seq. the “FHA,” collectively the “Housing Discrimination Laws”).
Agencies such as the New York State Homes & Community Renewal (HCR) ( doc-w-kyr-justice-involvement_9.12.2022.pdf (ny.gov) ), the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) (marketing-handbook-8-21.pdf (nyc. gov) ), the New York City Housing Development Corporation (HDC), and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) ( Office of the General Counsel (hud.gov) ), have long taken the position that blanket denial of applicants with criminal convictions has a disparate impact on persons of color.
As such, these agencies have implemented restrictions and recommendations for entities receiving benefits from such agencies when reviewing criminal background checks for prospective applicants.
Effective Jan. 1, 2025, by amendments to the City Human Rights Law, otherwise known as the Fair Chance for Housing Act, or Local Law No. 24 (the “Fair Chance for Housing Act”), it shall be an “unlawful discriminatory practice” for all New York City owners, lessors, managing agents, and others having the right to sell, rent or lease
a housing accommodation (“covered entities”) to, inter alia, (a) “refuse to rent, lease, approve the sale, rental or lease or otherwise deny to or withhold a housing accommodation from an individual” (NYC Admin Code §8-107[o][1][A]), (b) provide different “terms, conditions or privileges of the sale, rental, or lease of a housing accommodation or an interest therein, or in the furnishing of faculties or services in connection therewith” (NYC Admin Code §8-107[o][1] [B]), (c) “represent to any individual that any housing accommodation or an interest therein is not available for inspection, sale, rental or lease” (NYC Admin Code §8-107[o][1][C]), or (d) “declare, print, or circulate or cause to be declared, printed or circulated any statement, advertisement, or publication, or use any form of application for the purchase, rental or lease of a housing accommodation, which expresses, directly or indirectly, any limitation, specification, or discrimination in housing” (NYC Admin Code §8-107[o][1][D]), based upon an “individual’s criminal history, other than an individual’s reviewable (“reviewable” is the key, as defined below) criminal history obtained and considered” in conformity with the City Human Rights Law. (id.).
Of equal import, the Fair Chance for Housing Act defines “unlawful discriminatory practices” to include the act of conducting a criminal background check that fails to strictly conform with the rigid requirements of the City Human Rights Law (see NYC Admin Code §8-107[o][1][E]). These requirements dictate when a criminal background check may be run, the type of criminal history that may be considered, and how a covered entity might take adverse action against prospective applicants based upon the results returned, if at all. It is expected that civil actions and administrative proceedings alleging a perfunctory failure to abide
Cori A. Rosen Member
by these rigid requirements, regardless of whether an applicant was, in fact, denied the housing in question, will ensue following the Fair Chance for Housing Act’s effective date.
What is Reviewable Criminal History?
The Fair Chance for Housing Act provides that covered entities may only look at “reviewable criminal history” when qualifying an applicant for tenancy, sale, or lease of a housing accommodation. Reviewable criminal history includes, only, criminal histories involving (i) registered sex offenses (with no temporal lookback restrictions), (ii) convictions, or pending arrests for, misdemeanors where less than three (3) years have passed from the date of release from incarceration, or the date of sentencing if not incarcerated, and (iii) convictions, or pending arrests for, felonies where less than five (5) years have passed from the date of release from incarceration or the date of sentencing if not incarcerated (NYC Admin Code. §8-102a).
Expressly excluded from “reviewable criminal history” are (i) convictions sealed, expunged, pardoned, relieved, nullified or vacated; (ii) convictions in jurisdictions outside of New York for health, reproductive or gender affirming care, or cannabis possession that would not be a conviction had they occurred within the state; (iii) convictions resolved in favor of the accused that were terminated, sealed, for a violation, or sealed; (iv) pending cases adjourned in contemplation of dismissal; and (v) crimes disposed of in outside jurisdictions that are comparable to the crimes excluded in New York (NYC Admin Code §8-102a).
When Should a Criminal Background Check Occur?
Arguably, housing providers and the like have been running background checks (i.e., for credit worthiness and criminal history) at the time that a prospective tenant, purchaser and/or applicant submits a completed application. With the enactment of the Fair Chance for Housing Act, criminal background checks may only occur after an applicant is otherwise approved for the housing accommodation in question, and has been provided with a purchase, rental or lease agreement committing the same to them (NYC Admin Code §8-107[5][o][4][B]).This process ensures that the criminal background check is the sole reason for the rejection because the transaction has been completed and is binding subject to the criminal background check.
Even prior to doing so, however, a covered entity must provide notice to the applicant of its intent to run a criminal background check and give the applicant a copy a document referenced in the City Human Rights Law as “the city’s fair chance housing notice” (the “Fair Chance Notice,” see NYC Admin Code §8-107[o][4][C]) which is to be created and made publicly available by the New York City Commission on Human Rights (the “Commission”).
As of the date that this article was drafted (Nov. 27, 2024), however, the Commission has not created or publicized the same, giving covered entities little time to educate employees and staff and otherwise ensure that their policies and practices are in order by the Fair Chance for Housing Act’s effective date.
A covered entity that provided a purchase, rental or lease agreement committing the housing accommodation to the applicant, notified the applicant of its intent to run a background check, and provided a copy of the yet to be published Fair Chance Notice. The covered entity receives a report detailing “reviewable criminal history,” now what?
The covered entity can only revoke the tendered lease commitment based on reviewable criminal history, after engaging in what is known as the “Fair Chance Housing Process” (NYC Admin Code §8-107[o][5]). This process requires covered entities to provide applicants with all information received in conjunction with a criminal background check, whether or not relied upon or considered by the covered entity.
Thereafter, the covered entity must give the applicant no less than five (5) business days to submit information identifying errors in the criminal history returned, and/or to provide supplemental or mitigating information in support of the application (see NYC Admin Code §§8-107[o][5][a][i]-[iii]).
Upon receipt of this information, or if none is received after five business days, the covered entity must conduct an individualized assessment of the “reviewable criminal history” and any supplemental information provided by the applicant. If the covered entity intends to take adverse action based upon the information reviewed, it is required to provide the applicant with a written notice detailing the same.
The adverse action notice must detail and demonstrate how the reviewable criminal history is relevant to a legitimate business interest of the covered entity and how any information submitted in support of such individual’s tenancy was considered and must include copies of any documentation reviewed or relied upon during such individualized assessment (see NYC Admin Code §8-107[o][6]).
What does this mean? Housing providers, and other covered entities, might be liable for housing discrimination, not just for improperly rejecting applicants with criminal histories, but for failing to follow these procedures, perhaps even in instances where the application was approved. The law goes further to hold that covered entities are imputed with liability for any missteps by third-party screening companies retained to conduct these background checks.
If a covered entity fails to take reasonable steps to ensure that a utilized screening company conducts background checks in conformance with the Fair Chance for Housing Act and it receives information excluded from the definition of reviewable criminal history, it is presumed to have relied on such information. This presumption can only be rebutted by affirmatively showing that Fair Chance Housing Process was otherwise strictly followed, and that the covered entity did not rely on the wrongly received information in revoking the applicant’s lease offer (see NYC Admin Code. §8-107[5][o][7]).
It is critical that the contract with any service provider performing the criminal background search require strict compliance with the law, and specify, among other things, the time parameters for criminal infractions to be searched, as well as specifics as to what is considered reviewable criminal history. The report must only include those items specified in the contract and allowable at law, given the ramifications associated with a covered entity even receiving any information beyond what is deemed reviewable criminal history.
With this in mind, a covered entity will have to weigh the costs associated with revoking any lease offer based upon a criminal background check. Inevitably, many, if not most, rejections will result in a civil action by a private party or nonprofit advocacy group, or an administrative proceeding brought by the Commission or State Division on Human Rights (the agency tasked with enforcement of the SHRL) because all rejected applicants will know that criminal history was the catalyst for denial of their application. While a covered entity can rebut this discrimination claim, by showing that the denial was premised upon a legitimate business purpose, doing so is expensive, and a successful respondent is without recourse to recoup legal fees and expenses under the City Human Rights Law.
If unable to defeat a complaint for unlawful discriminatory practices, the exposure extends beyond the fees for defense. Fiscal liability for compensatory damages, punitive damages, and civil penalties may be awarded, as well as affirmative directives and injunctive relief, such as a mandate to create fair housing policies, set aside units for members of the aggrieved protected class, conduct trainings, publish notices, and report on future compliance. In the event of a challenge to a rejection, injunctive relief might include an order preventing leasing or the sale of the housing accommodation in question during the pendency of litigation, further increasing the costs of such litigation.
The worst exposure, however, is arguably that an adverse discrimination finding (or a published settlement) opens the floodgates to opportunistic lawsuits by attorneys and testing agencies hoping to establish a pattern or practice of discrimination and to profit from the right to recover attorney fees under the applicable Housing Discrimination Laws.
The best way to avoid liability is to create policies and educate employees on compliance with the Housing Discrimination Laws. Apart from the obvious avoidance of litigation, these proactive measures are often considered by administrative agencies investigating and, hopefully, dismissing allegations of housing discrimination.
The Legal Landscape for Condominium Sponsor Defects Cases: Acting Before Time Runs Out
New York Law Journal– November 8, 2024
By Matthew E. Eiben
Matthew E. Eiben Counsel
In New York, condominium sponsor defect cases provide essential protections for unit owners and boards of managers facing construction flaws attributable to the sponsor. Sponsors are responsible for overseeing the assembly, construction, and sale of condominium units, as well as issuing the offering plan that contains representations concerning the building’s construction and design.
There are a number of potential remedies to consider when seeking to address such defects, including those provided by common law, statute, the condo’s governing documents (including the offering plan and declaration) and individual unit owners’ respective purchase and sale agreements. As explained herein, it is extremely important to act promptly in pursuing these remedies as there are often strict timing restrictions which must be complied with, otherwise the claims may be deemed waived. Further, even if timely brought, if the sponsor has sold all its units at the time of an award of damages, there could be issues collecting on the award which may require costly litigation to breach the corporate veil (i.e. seek to hold the sponsor’s individual principals liable) and/or claw back fraudulent transfers that the sponsor may have initiated in an attempt to avoid collection.
Common Causes of Action in Sponsor Defect Cases
Sponsor-defect litigation may involve claims based on breach of warranty, breach of contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence. Each type of claim provides different avenues for relief, but the strict statutes of limitations demand early action by unit owners and boards.
1. Breach of Warranty
New York’s General Business Law
§777-b provides an implied housing merchant warranty for newly constructed condominium units within multi-unit structures of five stories or less. This warranty includes coverage against material defects for six years, as well as protection against plumbing and electrical issues for two years and skillful construction-related defects for one year after construction completion. Importantly, this implied warranty does not apply to buildings over five stories (see Bd. of Managers of Beacon Tower Condominium v 85 Adams St., LLC, 136 AD3d 680 [2d Dept 2016]).
For larger buildings, owners must rely on limited warranties from the sponsor set forth in the Offering Plan and/ or Declaration. These warranties are often narrow in scope and designed to supersede the implied warranty. These limited warranties may also include specific notice requirements, limiting the owners’ ability to bring breach of warranty claims unless they follow strict timelines (see Finnegan v Brooke Hill, LLC, 38 AD3d 491 [2d Dept 2007] and Pine St. Homeowners Association (Ass’n) v 20 Pine St. LLC, 109 AD3d 733 [1st Dept 2013]).
Courts have upheld sponsors’ ability to limit liability by providing specific warranty terms in offering plans and purchase agreements.
2. Breach of Contract
Unit owners or condominium boards can bring a claim for breach of contract to enforce promises within the offering plan or purchase agreements, especially when they are separate from the limited warranty. For instance, in Bd. of Managers of Be William Condominium v 90 William St. Dev. Group LLC, 187 AD3d 680 (1st Dept 2020), the sponsor was held to have breached the offering plan by failing to obtain a permanent certificate of occupancy and not adhering to construction standards outlined in the offering plan.
Offering plans often detail the layout, construction standards, and materials, creating enforceable expectations under contract law. Courts will permit breach of contract claims if the sponsor failed to fulfill specific promises, provided they are distinct from warranty obligations (see Tiffany at Westbury Condominium By Its Bd. of Managers v Marelli Dev. Corp., 40 AD3d 1073 [2d Dept 2007]).
3. Fraud
Fraud claims provide another remedy, particularly if a sponsor made affirmative misrepresentations in the offering plan. To sustain a fraud claim, plaintiffs must show intentional falsehoods rather than omissions (see Bd. of Managers of Latitude Riverdale Condominium v 3585 Owner, LLC, 199 AD3d 441 [1st Dept 2021]). Courts have supported fraud claims where sponsors actively concealed or misrepresented material conditions, such as hiding water damage by painting over it (see Kerusa Co. LLC v W10Z/515 Real Estate Ltd. Partnership, 12 NY3d 236 [2009]), installing dummy air vents that did not lead anywhere (see 18 E 80 th Realty Corporation v 68 th Associates, 173 AD2d 245 [1 st Dept 1991]), and installation of an unsafe and unfunctional gas furnace (see Hamlet on Olde Oyster Bay Home Owners Association v The Holiday Organization, 12 Misc.3d 1192[A] [Sup Ct, Nassau County 2006]).
Courts have also permitted fraud claims against individual principals of the sponsor entity, where the plaintiff can allege specific facts to support the claim (see The Bd. Of Mgrs. Of 252 Condo. v World-Wide Holdings Corp., 2024 WL 3409160, 2024 NY Slip Op 32511[U] [Sup. Ct, New York County, Masely, J.]).
However, fraud claims can be dismissed if duplicative of breach of contract claims unless they involve distinct tortious conduct beyond contractual breaches (see Bd.
of Managers of Beacon Tower Condominium v 85 Adams St., LLC, 136 AD3d 680 [2d Dept 2016]; Pine St. Homeowners Ass’n v 20 Pine St. LLC, 109 AD3d 733 [1st Dept 2013]).
4. Breach of
Fiduciary Duty
Sponsor-appointed board members have fiduciary duties to the condominium as a whole, even during the sponsor’s control period. Although sponsors may retain control of the board for a period of time post-construction, typically around five years, their appointed board members must act in the best interests of the condominium. In Bowery 263 Condominium Inc. v D.N.P. 336 Covenant Ave. LLC, 169 AD3d 541 [1st Dept 2019], the court confirmed that board members appointed by the sponsor still owed fiduciary duties to unit owners.
Breach of fiduciary duty claims against sponsor-appointed members can be challenging unless the allegations specify individual wrongdoing. The business judgment rule further protects board members when actions taken in good faith fall within their authority (see Bd. of Managers of Latitude Riverdale Condominium v 3585 Owner, LLC, 199 AD3d 441 [1st Dept 2021]).
5. Negligence
In cases where sponsors have breached duties that go beyond contractual obligations, unit owners can bring negligence claims. However, negligence claims are often dismissed if they overlap with breach of contract claims. For instance, courts have rejected negligence claims in cases lacking allegations of duties independent of contractual agreements (see Bd. of Managers of Beacon Tower Condominium v 85 Adams St., LLC, 136 AD3d 680 [2d Dept 2016]; Pine St. Homeowners Ass’n v 20 Pine St. LLC, 109 AD3d 733 [1st Dept 2013]).
6. Statutes of Limitations for Defect Claims
New York law enforces strict statutes of limitations on construction defect-related claims, with deadlines varying by claim type. Missing these deadlines could forfeit owners’ ability to recover damages.
Breach of warranty claims are subject to a six-year statute of limitations under CPLR 213(2). This period generally begins upon substantial completion of construction or occupancy (see Bayridge Air Rights, Inc. v Blitman Const. Corp., 160 AD2d 589 [1st Dept 1990], affd, 80 NY2d 777 [1992]). Limited warranties typically contain far shorter notice requirements, as in Tribeca Space Managers, Inc. v Tribeca Mews Ltd., 200 AD3d 626 [1st Dept 2021].
The statute of limitations for breach of contract claims is six years from when the cause of action accrues, typically at substantial completion or upon occupancy (see Garron v Bristol House, Inc., 162 AD3d 857 [2d Dept 2018]). CPLR 213(8) governs fraud claims, which must be filed within six years from the date of the wrongdoing or two years from discovery of the fraud (or when it should have been discovered with reasonable diligence). This extended timeframe applies specifically to fraud-based claims.
Negligence claims carry a three-year statute of limitations from the injury date, though this period may be tolled if there is evidence of ongoing negligence (see Bd. of Managers of Yardarm Beach Condominium v Vector Yardarm Corp., 109 AD2d 684 [1st Dept 1985]).
7. Defenses to the Statutes of Limitations
Several legal doctrines may extend or toll statutes of limitations, though they are applied sparingly: Continuing Wrong Doctrine: This doctrine may toll limitations for ongoing wrongful acts, such as continual building maintenance issues (see Garron v Bristol House, Inc., 162 AD3d 857 [2d Dept 2018]). However, it does not apply if
the wrong’s effects are ongoing rather than the act itself (see Henry v Bank of Am., 147 AD3d 599 [1st Dept 2017]).
Equitable Estoppel: Equitable estoppel applies when a party’s misconduct prevented timely action. For instance, in Rite Aid Corp. v Grass, 48 AD3d 363 [1st Dept 2008], plaintiffs claimed equitable estoppel due to the defendant’s actions that misled them from timely filing. However, to invoke this doctrine, plaintiffs must show due diligence in discovering the facts and initiating the action.
8. The Importance of Acting Quickly
Given the various statutes of limitations and specific procedural requirements, boards and unit owners must take swift action to identify defects and file claims. The first step is to identify and document all defects. This should be done by engaging a licensed engineer or architect, together with legal counsel, so that a detailed report with photos, video and conclusions and observations from the engineer and/or architect. As the cost of this step can be significant, to the extent there is not yet a non-sponsor board of managers, residents often pool their resources and pursue these claims collectively.
9. Conclusion
Condominium sponsor defect cases are time-sensitive matters, as statutes of limitations impose strict deadlines on various claims and the governing contracts impose even stricter requirements for the limited issues that may be covered under such express warranties. In the competitive and complex landscape of New York real estate, boards and unit owners must act quickly to enforce their rights.
To Appeal or Not To Appeal: That Is the Question
New York Law Journal– October 1, 2024
By Gary M. Rosenberg and Bradley S. Silverbush
To appeal or not to appeal, that is a question faced eventually by every litigator. But questions relating to the facts of a case or the applicable law aside (for the moment), what do the statistics demonstrate for the appellate practitioner?
One of the many responsibilities of the Chief Administrative Judge for the New York State Unified Court System (UCS) is compliance with Judiciary Law Section 212 (requiring that an annual report be filed compiling and publishing the statistics of every court in the state). A review of the 2023 Annual Report (//www.nycourts. gov/legacyPDFS/23-Annual-Report. pdf ) reveals statistics which underscore the UCS’s commitment to justice and fairness, innovation and progress, and a staggering budget.
Some facts: in 2023, the UCS collected nearly $52 million from attorney registration revenues, and over $472 million by the Criminal History Search Unit, for criminal history search records. For the current fiscal year (April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2025), the New York State Legislature approved appropriations of $3.4 billion for the state judiciary. As Chief Administrative Judge Joseph A. Zayas stated in his opening message to the Report, “Our past is illustrious, and our future has never looked brighter, despite the challenges we all face in the elusive effort to fulfill the constitutional promise of equal justice for all. And that’s what it’s all about—equal justice for all. Everything else—legislative goals, budget, personnel—is merely a means to that end.”
This is a commendable and admirable point that everyone should embrace; not just the judiciary, but attorneys and litigants as well. With this goal at the forefront of legal profession’s collective mind, let’s look at the statistics to see how that actually played out last year. While the number of filings at the trial court level throughout the State demon -
strate a fourth consecutive year of increased filings, the actual total number for 2023 (2,472,802) is down from the pre-COVID number of filings (3,021,016).
Most attorneys, especially trial and appellate practitioners, will want to jump to look at the caseload activity at the Appellate Division and the Court of Appeals. Statewide (including all four Departments in both civil and criminal cases), the Report indicates that there were a total of 14,935 cases that were disposed of after argument or submission of an appeal. Of these, over half (8,007) were disposed of before argument or submission of the appeal (e.g., they were dismissed, withdrawn, or settled). Of the remaining 6,928 cases that were disposed of after argument or submission of the appeal, 4,138 were affirmed, 1,022 were reversed, 849 were modified, and 760 were dismissed (with 159 appeals falling into a category defined as “other”).
It gets even more interesting if one focuses on the caseload activity at the Court of Appeals. Table 1 of the Report reveals the caseload activity for 2023 (the year commencing April 1, 2023 and ending March 31, 2024); the Court decided a total of 93 appeals. How did those cases go from the Appellate Division to the Court of Appeals? The statistics show that in 50 cases, the Court of Appeals granted permission, while there were 15 cases where permission was granted by the Appellate Division (there were also three cases that involved a constitutional question, and 13 in the “other” category). Of those 93 appeals, 57 involved civil cases, while 36 involved criminal cases.
What was the result of those 93 appeals? 36 affirmances and 40 reversals (with five resulting in modifications, two dismissals, and ten in the “other” category). A footnote to the table indicates that “other” category includes anomalies which did
Gary M. Rosenberg Member
Bradley S. Silverbush Member
not result in an affirmance, reversal, modification or dismissal (e.g., judicial suspensions, acceptance of a case for review pursuant to Court Rule 500.27).
Put another way, one could fairly conclude that overall, state-wide decisions of the Appellate Division are more often reversed than they are affirmed. While in civil cases, it is almost an even split (with 22 affirmances and 20 reversals), in criminal cases there is a significant difference (with 14 affirmances and 20 reversals). But what does this information mean to the practitioner, and more importantly, to one’s clients (aside from the obvious statistical conclusions one might infer from the foregoing)?
It certainly suggests that reasonable minds can differ on the assessment of the strength of case, the applicability of the law to one’s facts, the admissibility or interpretation of evidence, or any one of dozens of legal issues that are frequently raised on appeal (e.g., the denial or granting of a motion in limine or a CPLR 4404 motion; the propriety of a jury charge; admission/exclusion of evidence; pre-trial motions relating to discovery, or dispositive motion practice). So, what does an attorney tell a client when discussing the inevitable question, whether to appeal, or not?
Naturally, the first question is what is to be gained or lost if an immediate appeal is taken. In this regard, there are three major considerations to discuss.
First, whether time will be saved or lost if an appeal is taken immediately (noting that CPLR 5501 specifically states that an appeal from a final judgment brings up for review “any nonfinal judgment or order which necessarily affects the final judgment”). In fact, there may be no compelling need to take an immediate appeal (for example, from an interlocutory order that can be raised if an appeal from the final judgment is even necessary). This is more often a major consideration when representing a plaintiff who seeks to move the case forward quickly, especially if the determination is adverse to one’s client.
Of course, if an attorney is representing a client who is the defendant, then that attorney may be seeking to delay a final determination of the case and what better way is there than to seek a stay pending appeal of an interlocutory order, as provided by CPLR 5519?
Another question most clients will ask is what the financial cost of the appeal is weighed against the likelihood of gaining an economic benefit (i.e., a cost/benefit analysis). Invariably, all clients want to know about the likelihood of success. This is where an attorney may want to instill the client with a sense of confidence.
Some might say that it is better to under promise and over deliver than to over promise and under deliver. But then again, under promising might send a false signal; it may suggest to the client that perhaps the attorney lacks confidence in his or her ability, or the necessary experience, to win the appeal. And yet again, if the attorney over-promises, then the attorney may be held accountable by the client who doesn’t achieve the expected result (presenting a situation where a client might assert this as an excuse not to make full payment).
Regardless, no responsible attorney should offer an assessment of the viability of an appeal without a thorough understanding of the facts and applicable law. As any experienced lawyer may tell a potential client (because it is a statistical fact, you can look it up), throughout history, lawyers have won cases that they should have lost, and lost cases that they should have won, and the one thing that all lawyers know for certain is that without a thorough examination of the record (and understanding of the applicable law), who can tell a client that anything about an appeal is certain?
Clients want to believe in their attorneys, so, perhaps an attorney should not take a case unless a satisfactory result is achievable. But consistent with that philosophy, it is impossible to determine whether an appeal is supportable and viable until the lawyer has completed their thorough review and analysis of the record and answered all of the client’s questions. Only then can an attorney share and discuss their assessment with the client, including cost, time, and likelihood of success.
Review of the 2023 Report provides some comfort in the knowledge provided by those statistics. Mindful that statewide at the Division there were only 4,138 affirmance out of 6,928 post submission/argument appeals, and the affirmance/reversal statistics are even tighter at the Court of Appeals, this seems to suggest that an appellate practitioner who understands the case and knows what they are doing can turn a losing determination into a winner on appeal. And who doesn’t want to be a winner?
PRESS RELEASES
Throughout this recent quarter, R&E’s attorneys had a number of remarkable achievements, including forming two new groups addressing the changes in NYC’s real estate, as well as being recognized for their legal achievements.
Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. Forms New Group
Dedicated to NYC Development
Expert team assembled as New York prepares to implement City of Yes plan
Featuring Daniel M. Bernstein, Nicholas DiLorenzo, David J. Rosenberg & Adam R. Sanders
December 5, 2024: Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., currently celebrating its 50th year as one of New York City’s pre-eminent real estate law firms, announced that the firm has established its NYC Development Group (NYCDG) to provide expert legal solutions for clients navigating the city’s rapidly evolving development landscape.
The announcement follows the recent approval of Mayor Eric Adams’ City of Yes for Housing Opportunity (COY) by the Subcommittee on Zoning and Committee on Land Use, which has paved the way for imminent NYC Council approval. COY builds on New York State’s enactment of major development incentives and legal changes this past April. Assembling a specialized team will enable R&E to harness the firm’s collective expertise in deal structuring, property tax incentives, affordable housing, zoning and regulatory hurdles to tackle issues impacting the development of residential, commercial and other properties across the city.
“As New York’s largest real estate only law firm, R&E closely monitors market trends, as well as reforms occurring in Albany and at City Hall that impact, enable and incentivize development across the city,” said Michael E. Lefkowitz, Managing Member of Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. and a Leader of its Transactional Department. “Recent City of Yes approvals have changed the terrain again and our new Development Group is positioned
to provide a one-stop-shop of comprehensive legal guidance that will enable clients to make the very best real estate decisions.”
NYCDG will be led by R&E Member Daniel M. Bernstein and Counsel Nicholas DiLorenzo (Tax Incentives & Affordable Housing); Counsel David J. Rosenberg (Land Use/Zoning); and Member Adam R. Sanders (Transactions).
Their expertise runs the gamut of development issues including: office to residential conversions and incentives pursuant to 467-m; New construction 485-x projects/Universal Affordability Preference; Construction wage and M/WBE Requirements; Opportunity Zone acquisitions, developments, and investments; NYC Industrial Plan; Neighborhood rezonings; ICAP; Private rezonings and entitlements; and more.
Said Bernstein, “The City of Yes approvals represent the most significant changes to New York land use and zoning regulations in decades and present developers with many new opportunities and challenges. With 50 years representing the city’s leading real estate players, R&E has a deep bench of experienced attorneys able to consider available economic incentives, zoning hurdles and identify issues before they turn into project delays. We look forward to providing our services as part of the firm’s dedicated NYC Development Group.”
Daniel M. Bernstein Member
Nicholas DiLorenzo Counsel
Adam R. Sanders Member
David J. Rosenberg Counsel
Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. secures City Council Approval for 962972 Franklin Avenue Rezoning
Firm completes its third successful rezo ning of the year with one of the most debated private applications to come before the city
Featuring Michael E. Lefkowitz & David J. Rosenberg
November 21, 2024: Rosenberg & Estis P.C., currently celebrating its 50th year as one of New York City’s pre-eminent real estate law firms, announced that it has successfully secured approval for the rezoning of 962-972 Franklin Ave., a planned 10-story, 355-unit rental building in Brooklyn’s Crown Heights neighborhood, on behalf of The Continuum Company and Lincoln Equities Group.
Called “one of the most debated private applications to come before the city” by City Planning Commission Chair Dan Garodnick, this historic rezoning will create the city’s first “Union BFO” (union built, financed, and operated) residential development–creating hundreds of new homes and over one thousand union jobs in Crown Heights.
“Despite significant headwinds, our clients had the vision and resolve to see this project through. I am honored to have played a key role in such an important project, especially as the city faces a generational housing shortage and the mass exodus of middle-class jobs,” said R&E Counsel David J. Rosenberg, who represented the developers.
Rosenberg and R&E’s multidisciplinary NYC Development Group leveraged the firm’s extensive experience navigating the city’s labyrinthine land use regulations to guide the project to approval. The team created a pioneering height-control mechanism to preserve sunlight for the Brooklyn Botanic Garden, while simultaneously structuring a legal framework that combines Mandatory Inclusionary Housing with 421-a tax benefits to deliver 106+
units of workforce housing as part of the project.
“Complex projects such as 962-972 Franklin require the kind of innovative thinking that is only possible when you can draw on experts in all aspects of real estate,” said Rosenberg. “I am grateful to be part of a team at Rosenberg & Estis that can deliver these kinds of results for our clients.”
“As our third successful rezoning of 2024, this approval cements R&E’s position as a powerhouse in New York City zoning and reflects our strategic investment to incorporate NYC Zoning and Land Use into our full-service real estate firm,” said Michael E. Lefkowitz, Managing Member of Rosenberg & Estis, P.C.. “Our ability to navigate complex approvals and drive innovative solutions across all aspects of real estate for our clients demonstrates why developers increasingly turn to R+E for their most challenging projects.”
R&E’s New York City Development Group seamlessly integrates the firm’s expertise in land use, zoning, affordable housing, tax incentives, and real estate transactions to tackle the city’s most complex projects. This unified approach enables comprehensive solutions that maximize value while skillfully navigating New York’s intricate regulatory landscape.
Court decision gives property owner right to pursue damages under Local Law 18
Featuring Michael A. Pensabene
October 16, 2024: Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., currently celebrating its 50th year as one of New York City’s pre-eminent real estate law firms, has successfully defeated a motion filed by Airbnb seeking to dismiss a lawsuit against it alleging that Airbnb illegally enabled a tenant to rent her apartment in violation of New York City’s Local Law 18.
The decision by the Hon. Suzanne Adams in the Supreme Court of the State of New York paves the way for landlord Columbus 69th LLC to seek damages against Airbnb for permitting the landlord’s tenant, Carmen Magarin de Dominguez, to illegally advertise and sublet her apartment using Airbnb’s platform.
“This is a precedent-setting decision that cements the validity and intent of Local Law 18, which Airbnb cannot evade, despite its stringent efforts,” said Michael A. Pensabene, a Member of Rosenberg & Estis’ Litigation Department, who represented the landlord.
Last year, Airbnb lost an appeal in the State Supreme Court challenging the legality of Local Law 18, which was enacted in January 2023 to curb short-term rentals in multi-family buildings, including rent controlled and stabilized apartments, Mitchell Lama properties and any property receiving a federally subsidized mortgage. The law also allows any property owner – of any property type – to prohibit shortterm rentals in their buildings by registering them on a “prohibited list” so that Airbnb and any other similar platform is on notice that they are not permitted to list apartments in these buildings on their platforms.
Columbus 69th LLC originally filed
suit arguing that Airbnb failed to verify de Dominguez’ short-term rental registration number, as required by Local Law 18, when she offered her three-bedroom unit at 207 Columbus Ave. for short-term lease on its platform.
At that time, the court granted a Temporary Restraining Order prohibiting the use and the advertisement of the host’s apartment on Airbnb until further argument could be heard.
In the interim, Airbnb filed its motion to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that Local Law 18 was a legislative effort with public goals that prohibited a private right of action.
However, in denying Airbnb’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, Judge Adams agreed with Pensabene’s argument that the action “complements” the law “by seeking other relief that is not part of the City’s enforcement mechanisms, yet at the same time “promotes the legislative purpose” of the law and is consistent with the legislative scheme.”
Said Pensabene, “We are pleased that the court agreed that our private action fits within the purpose of Local Law 18, which is to address illegal short-term rentals in New York City. Airbnb has played fast and loose with the rules for too long and this decision shows that the court will not stand for it.”
Michael E. Pensabene Member
Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. forms New Distressed Real Estate Group
Pre-eminent law firm creates ‘one-stop-shop’ for clients facing real estate distress challenges
Featuring Michael E. Lefkowitz
Michael E. Lefkowitz Managing Member
October 8, 2024: Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., currently celebrating its 50th year as one of New York City’s pre-eminent real estate law firms, announced that it has formed a new Distressed Real Estate Group to provide expert legal solutions for clients facing challenges from the distress currently facing the real estate market.
The group has been assembled to address the urgent needs of lenders, borrowers, and investors as they navigate the shifting landscape of the New York City real estate market. R&E’s team brings decades of expertise on complex loan workouts, distressed property acquisitions, and litigation, among many other areas.
With a multidisciplinary team that includes attorneys from R&E’s Real Estate, Litigation, Corporate, Restructuring, and Bankruptcy practices, R&E will deliver legal solutions that help clients preserve their assets or take advantage of opportunities in the current market.
Michael E. Lefkowitz, Managing Member of Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. and a Leader of R&E’s Transactional Department, said, “Commercial real estate owners and lenders face a rapidly evolving market as over $1.5 trillion of U.S. commercial real estate debt is expected to mature by the end of 2025. Higher interest rates, decreased property values and escalating operating costs have made refinancing and restructuring real estate portfolios extremely challenging. Our new Distressed Real Estate Group provides comprehensive legal guidance for those navigating this tumultuous market.”
The Distressed Real Estate Group offers a full spectrum of legal
services designed to address every aspect of distressed real estate, from distressed debt and loan restructuring to foreclosure and real estate litigation, ensuring that clients receive strategic advice at every stage of the deal or litigation cycle. The group’s unique, “one-stop” approach allows clients to navigate both transactional and litigation challenges without the need to consult multiple legal advisors.
“We’ve seen every phase of the commercial real estate cycle, and we understand how to help clients manage different forms of distress,” said Lefkowitz. “Our goal is to help property owners and investors not only to survive but to find new opportunities in the current market climate.”
R&E is a recognized leader in real estate litigation and restructuring, particularly in foreclosure law. The R&E team regularly advises prominent lenders, investment funds, and real estate stakeholders on high-stakes litigation involving distressed assets. By leveraging their expertise, R&E’s litigation team helps clients minimize the costs associated with court proceedings, while maximizing asset recovery in a volatile market.
In addition to their litigation prowess, R&E’s attorneys are adept at out-of-court solutions, including loan recapitalizations, deed-in-lieu transactions, and distressed property sales. R&E is uniquely equipped to handle the complexities of New York’s real estate market, including rent regulatory due diligence, ensuring clients remain compliant with state laws while navigating distressed real estate transactions.
RECENT EVENTS
As New York City’s premier real estate law firm, R&E attorneys are regularly invited to serve as speakers on in-person panels and webinars, while also attending key industry and charitable events to stay engaged and give back to the community.
12.14.2024
Winter Wishes
We want to thank everyone who made R&E’s Winter Wishes program a success during this past holiday season. Together, we brought joy and gifts to 60 children. 2024 marked R&E’s ninth year partnering with New York Cares to spread the holiday cheer to underprivileged children in our community.
12.12.2024
Gotham Organization Holiday Party
R&E Member Luise A. Barrack and Counsel Justin Weitzman were pleased to join the Gotham Organization’s holiday festivities at the Gotham West Market. Photographed above (Left to Right) are Gotham Organization’s Sara Hylas and Phil Lavoie, along with Luise A. Barrack and Justin Weitzman. Holiday festivities are a great way to connect with clients. Luise and Justin enjoyed the evening and look forward to working with Gotham in 2025.
12.11.2024
New York City Bar Association Housing & Urban Development Committee Meeting
R&E hosted the December meeting of the New York City Bar Association Housing & Urban Development Committee, led by Co-Chairs Julia Solo and Farhana Hassan Choudhury. R&E Member Daniel M. Bernstein (Photographed Left), who is also a Committee Member, and Counsel David J. Rosenberg (Photographed Right) were in attendance. David Rosenberg also gave a presentation on the recent City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, providing valuable insights on what its zoning amendments mean for NYC’s affordable housing development.
12.10.2024 CLE: NYC Property Tax Incentive and Regulatory
Diligence 101:
Updates for NYC Purchasers and Lenders
R&E Member, Daniel M. Bernstein and Counsel Nicholas DiLorenzo
(Photographed Left to Right) presented a CLE webinar titled “NYC Tax Incentives & Regulatory Diligence Updates”. The CLE saw a strong in-person and online attendance. It was a great learning experience for all!
12.10.2024
Atlantic Terminal Anniversary Gala Event
R&E Members Deborah E. Riegel, Adam R. Sanders and Cori A. Rosen (Photographed Left to Right) attended the Atlantic Terminal Anniversary Gala Event hosted by Madison Capital. The event celebrated two decades of Atlantic Terminal, a cornerstone of the community and a vibrant hub in the heart of downtown Brooklyn. This celebratory evening highlighted Atlantic Terminal’s legacy of innovation, accessibility, and community engagement, as well as its vital role in shaping the Brooklyn we know today.
12.10.2024
NYREC Holiday Party
R&E Associate Shakiva Pierre attended the NYREC Holiday Party. R&E previously collaborated with NYREC earlier this year when R&E hosted the inaugural Metropolitan Black Bar Association Black Real Estate Development in Symposium and Craig Livingston served as a panelist. Photographed above (Left to Right) are NYREC Chair Craig Livingston, Shakiva Pierre, and her clients from Pushing Forward Realty, Rayshaun Addison and Joshua Brown.
12.09.2024
EisnerAmper Real Estate Day
A big thank you to our colleagues at EisnerAmper for inviting us to participate in their internal Real Estate Day panel! R&E’s own Zachary J. Rothken, Member and Head of the Administrative Law Department, delivered an insightful update on real estate development in New York City. Meanwhile, R&E Counsel David J. Rosenberg shared expert insights on the recently passed FARE Act (broker fee bill) and all things related to the City of Yes initiative. Thanks again to EisnerAmper Partners David Rackman and Michael Vermut, along with Senior Manager Alyssa Dolinshek, for the invitation, stimulating discussions, and the warm EA hospitality. Photographed above (Left to RIght) are Zachary J. Rothken, Michael Vermut, David J. Rosenberg and Alyssa Dolinshek.
12.06.2024
R&E Members Adam R. Sanders and Cori A. Rosen (Photographed Left to Right) attended the annual BOMA Holiday Luncheon at the Ziegfeld Ballroom in New York City. Adam and Cori look forward to the BOMA event each year as it is a great way to connect with fellow BOMA Members.
12.05.2024
KALAGNY Annual Holiday Party
Jay H.Min (Photographed Right), R&E Associate and Korean American Lawyers Association of Greater New York (KALAGNY) member/Gala Logistics Subcommittee Co-Chair, attended the KALAGNY Annual Holiday Party in New York City. R&E proudly supports KALAGNY and its professional membership of attorneys and law students engaged with the issues affecting the Korean American community in Greater New York. Incorporated in 1986, KALAGNY seeks to encourage the professional growth of its members as well as provide pro bono and legal support for the Korean American community.
12.05.2024
NYC Bar Association: New Lawyers Reception
R&E Juris Doctors Miriam Avrutin, Michael Fortugno, and Sarah E. Silbowitz (Photographed Left to Right) attended a New Lawyers Reception hosted by and at the New York City Bar Association. This event was an opportunity to celebrate and connect with other new lawyers whether they passed the bar or are waiting to take it in February. Cheers to Miriam, Michael and Sarah on your advancement into the profession, we are thrilled to have you at R&E!
12.04.2024
Bisnow New York Power Women
R&E Member and Head of the Firm’s Litigation Department, Luise A. Barrack (Photographed Right) attended the Bisnow New York Power Women Event hosted at 7 World Trade Center. Luise was joined by colleague, Pamela Samuels (Photographed Left) of Corridor Holdings Corporation. The event celebrated this year’s honorees who were recognized as NIMBLE in 2024: NYC’s top women navigators, innovators and mentors.
R&E Member Zachary J. Rothken presented a webinar on “Rent Stabilization Due Diligence 101”, where he provided a comprehensive overview of the key concepts and strategies for successful rent stabilization due diligence, for both new landlords and seasoned property managers.
R&E Members Benjamin M. Williams, Zachary J. Rothken and Adam R. Sanders (Photographed Left to Right) joined NYAA for the largest real estate networking reception at NYC’s Tribeca Rooftop. R&E is pleased to continue its support of NYAA since its official launch. NYAA is now the largest trade organization of private multifamily building owners in the country, formed from the combined membership and staff of the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) and the Rent Stabilization Association (RSA).
R&E Member Daniel M. Bernstein (Photographed Center) presented an in-person CLE on “NYC Property Tax Incentives for Affordable Housing Development” at the New York City Bar Association. The program had a terrific turnout. Thank you to NYC Bar Association Housing & Urban Development Committee Co-chairs Julia A. Solo (Photographed Left) and Farhana Hassan Choudhury (Photographed Right) for sponsoring.
11.20.2024
Leadership Breakfast
R&E Members Adam R. Sanders and Cori A. Rosen (Photographed Left to Right) attended the Annual BOMA Leadership Breakfast at Club 101 in New York City. The Leadership Breakfast is always a signature event each year. This year, BOMA adopted its 2025 Board of Directors following the Keynote address by Jimmy Oddo, NYC Department of Buildings Commissioner.
R&E Member, Michael A. Pensabene and Counsel, Matthew Eiben (Photographed Above) attended the Fall NY Cooperator Expo 2024, New York’s Biggest & Best Co-op, Condo & Apt Expo hosted at the Jacob Javits Convention Center. This event recorded 2,500 participants, 200 exhibitors, 6 seminars and 24 speakers. It was the perfect opportunity to connect with property managers, board members, shareholders, and apartment building owners.
11.12.2024
Hot Topics Affecting Cooperatives & Condominiums Cases and Marketplace Developments in the Last Six Months
Benjamin M. Williams, R&E Member and Head of the Firm’s Property Tax Department presented an Update on Property Tax Certiorari. This presentation was part of a CLE hosted by the New York City Bar Association titled “Hot Topics Affecting Cooperatives & Condominiums Cases and Marketplace Developments in the Last Six Months.”
11.06.2024
Sixth Annual St. Jude Spirit of Hope Networking and Charity Event
R&E Member Lori Anker Nott and Daughter Jessica (Photographed Right to Left) attended the Commercial Real Estate & Construction Industries’ sixth annual St. Jude Spirit of Hope networking and charity event in New York City. The event benefits the St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. R&E is a proud sponsor of this event which supports the incredible mission of St Jude Children’s Research Hospital where no child is denied treatment based on race, religion, or a family’s ability to pay. All proceeds go directly to support this amazing cause and the critical work of St Jude Children’s Research Hospital.
11.04.2024
Jewish National Fund USA
Real Estate Lunch and Learn
R&E and Deborah E. Riegel partnered with the Jewish National Fund-USA to host their Real Estate Lunch and Learn featuring guest speaker Elie Klein, Liaison for ADI Negev-Nahalat Eran, a state-of-the-art rehabilitation village in Israel’s South. It was an informative and powerful presentation. Photographed above (Left to Right) are Sarah Azizi, Jewish National Fund-USA, Tristate Director, Manhattan; Elie Klein; and Deborah E. Riegel.
10.30.2024
YJP Real Estate Dinner & Forum
R&E Member Deborah E. Riegel (Photographed Left) moderated YJP’s Panel on “Leveraging Philanthropy into Growth: Building Success in Real Estate,” in a discussion with Albert Laboz, Founder at United American Land. It was an engaging and educational session, accompanied with good conversation and great networking opportunities.
10.30.2024
St. John’s 1L Diversity Fellowship Fair
R&E Associates J.P. Amato (Photographed Right) and Laura A. Raheb (Photographed Second from Right), both St. John’s Alumni, represented R&E at St. John’s 1L Diversity Fellowship Fair. The Fair was a great opportunity to speak with law school students and give them more infomation about our firm!
10.28.2024
St. John’s University Women in Litigation Panel
R&E Associate Ashley F. Williams (Photographed Center) attended the St. John’s University Women in Litigation panel event. The panel members discussed their respective paths and shared experience in litigation. Many students were in attendance and capitalized on the conclusory Q&A.
10.24.2024
Attorney Women’s GroupNight Out
The R&E Attorney Women’s Group hosted a night out at Electric Shuffle. The night proved to be one of camaraderie, good food and shuffle board. We look forward to the next one!
10.23.2024
R&E Members Cori Rosen (Photographed Left) and Anthony Virga (Photographed Right) attended the BOMA Fall Kingpin Bowling Tournament and networking event at Frames New York. This event was right up their alley– an opportunity to connect with fellow BOMA Members and colleagues.
10.23.2024
Goodbye to Summer (Last T.O.T. of the season)
R&E Attorneys and Staff came together for the year’s last “Thursdays on Third” on the 12th floor terrace, before Fall. The night started with a toast to celebrate our incredible Juris Doctors who passed the New York State Bar. Attorneys and Staff continued to a night of good food and fun conversations.
10.23.2024
CLE: NYC Property Tax Reviews
R&E Member Benjamin M. Williams presented an in-house lunchtime CLE titled “NYC Property Tax Reviews.” It was an informative session filled with key insights on NYC Property Tax to help our attorneys stay abreast of New York City Tax Law updates and changes.
10.22.2024
The MET Real Estate Council Benefit
R&E Member Richard L. Sussman attended The MET Real Estate Council Benefit. This black-tie gala raised funds to support the Museum’s general operating fund, which includes The MET’s dynamic educational programs.
Photographed above is Richard Sussman with Dean Amro from the Brodsky Organization (Left to Right). The evening featured an art exhibition, cocktails, and dinner.
10.21.2024
Torch Foundation Annual Golf Outing and Dinner
R&E Members Brett Theis, Ethan Cohen (Photographed Above) and Counsel Justin Weitzman attended the Torch Foundation Annual Golf Outing and Dinner at the Metropolis Country Club. R&E is a proud supporter of The Torch Foundation which has raised millions of dollars for children with a wide range of social, economic and medical conditions.
10.09.2024
Jewish National Fund USA Real Estate Division Kickoff
R&E Associates Ariel S. Bresky, Shayne Messing and Amanda Katz along with Member Alex M. Estis (Photographed Left to Right) attended a panel discussion with the Jewish National FundUSA’s Real Estate Division. It was a great night to network with peers. The event served as an opportunity to be part of the conversation with industry leaders as they examine where current real estate market trends are now and where the industry is going.
R&E Member Daniel M. Bernstein and Counsel Nicholas DiLorenzo (Photographed Left to Right) presented a lunchtime CLE titled “2024 Update: NYC Affordable Housing Property Tax Incentives.” The session provided valuable insights and updates, helping attorneys further enhance their knowledge and skills.
R&E Member Adam R. Sanders moderated Bisnow’s “Multifamily Asset Management Strategies: Maximizing Portfolio Performance” panel. Adam had a great afternoon with interesting conversations and established new industry connections.
10.08.2024
BOMA Fall Golf Invitational
R&E Members Cori A. Rosen and Ethan R. Cohen (Photographed Left to Right) attended the BOMA Fall Golf Invitational at the Fenway Golf Club. It was the perfect day for fall golf. BOMA New York represents all commercial real estate professionals in the five boroughs– the largest industry in the market area, contributing approximately $27 billion to the state economy. Members are responsible for the ownership and management of approximately 529 million square feet of office space, including some of the world’s most prestigious properties. Members include building owners, professional property management firms, professional service providers (architects, engineers, systems consultants, etc.) and contract services providers in construction, elevator maintenance, cleaning services, and others.
09.25.2024
Metropolitan
Black Bar Association Installation Ceremony and Reception
R&E Associate Shakiva S. Pierre (Photographed Right) attended the Metropolitan Black Bar Association’s (MBBA) Installation Ceremony and Reception. Shakiva is photographed above with the new MBBA President, Nicole LesterArrindell, at the recent installation ceremony. Shakiva will continue to serve as a co-chair for the MBBA’s Real Estate Law Section for the fourth consecutive year.
09.23.2024 Young Jewish Professionals: Mastering Real Estate: Dinner with Oxford Properties Group, GAIA Real Estate, Marx Realty & The NRP Group
R&E Counsel David J. Rosenberg (Photographed Right) attended the Young Jewish Professionals (YJP) event Mastering Real Estate: Dinner with Oxford Properties Group, GAIA Real Estate, Marx Realty & The NRP Group. This event was particularly special as the Development & Achievement Award was presented to Ian Bruce Eichner, CEO, Chairman & Founder at Continuum Company (Photographed Left) by R&E’s David Rosenberg.
