Journey Through the Last 25 Years of Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

25 years ago, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was born. Although, we couldn't tell you our complete story in one Newsletter, we asked our attorneys, paralegals and staff members to choose their favorites in various categories. Like an award show, they chose their favourite/best/touching moments/winners. 25 years ago, we opened our doors trying to create the finest real estate law firm in New York. We certainly have worked the hardest, sweated the most, and put together some of the best work product.

We were built to do the impossible, create miracles, and find that unicorn. We have been kicked in the teeth and beaten down to the core. We had moments of not knowing if we had the strength to carry on another hour in pursuit of justice for that client who needed us to hang on. And we have never given up on a case, a matter, a deal point, or anything that has mattered to a client.

Over and over again, our belief in ourselves in seeking justice and fighting against injustice has propelled us into the firm we are today 25 years later.

One regret, often reflected, is that we did not discuss our charity work and Building Foundations and Dreams in this newsletter and all the dreams that we made come true. A link to our firm charity can be found at the bottom of the page.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Timeline

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.'s Most Important Cases

*as chosen by Adam Leitman Bailey P.C.'s attorneys, paralegals, staff members and law clerks

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Wins Landmark Victories Using a Forgotten and Overlooked Federal Law: Judge Rules Condo Deals Come Under Federal Law; a ‘Game Changer’ Decision

In late 2008, the real estate sky had started to fall and fall quickly. As a result of the loss of financing and wages, many purchasers in contract to buy a unit in a newly constructed building were either no longer able or willing to close on their units. To make matters worse, the credit markets had been greatly curtailing the flow of money into the hands of developers from purchasers. In March 2008, one of the last outposts of lending, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, put the brakes on loans to newly constructed buildings by requiring sales of at least 70 percent of a building’s units in order for its buyers to obtain a loan.

A prominent magazine noted Adam Leitman Bailey as the real estate attorney, “credited with being the first lawyer in New York City to use the ILSA provision.” Although this policy later changed to 50 percent and “sold” became “in contract” for most lenders’ purposes, the perfect real estate storm became a hurricane when many developers no longer had the capital to deliver the building as promised in the marketing materials; Engineers found serious problems with many structures including in some cases the failure to build in accordance with fire prevention protocols and materials.

Thousands of purchasers turned to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. to find them some way to rescue them from financial ruin. Turning to a forgotten federal statute called the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. discovered a way to void the contracts of sales for buildings over 100 units. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. assisted almost a thousand purchasers in closing on these homes at discounted prices or obtaining a refund of their deposits. The Wall Street Journal quoted a prominent New York developer’s attorney calling these holdings a “game changer” affecting hundreds of newly constructed buildings nationwide. Another prominent magazine noted that Adam Leitman Bailey, “pioneered the use of the ILSA provision to get buyers out of contracts in the wake of the financial crisis.”

Adam Leitman Bailey is credited as being the first lawyer in New York City to use the ILSA provision to get buyers out of contracts in the wake of the financial crisis.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law, Defeating Successor Sponsor Construction Defect Claim Against Developer Who Bought Units From Bankrupt Sponsor

In a decision of first impression, the Brooklyn Supreme Court held that a successor condominium sponsor is not liable for building defects caused by the original sponsor’s construction of the condominium. Justice Lawrence Knipel threw out a condominium board’s claim seeking to impose construction defect liability on a developer who purchased the interest of the condominium’s bankrupt original sponsor under a Chapter 11 Plan.

The Bayard Views Condominium, a 62-unit luxury building overlooking McCarren Park in Brooklyn, was completed just before the 2008 recession, which forced the original sponsor into Chapter 11 bankruptcy after it could sell only 25 apartments. In 2011 a subsidiary of the property group of the successor sponsor, a Brooklyn developer who was uninvolved with the building’s construction, was able to purchase the remaining 37 apartments under the sponsor’s Chapter 11 Plan.

To sell its 37 apartments, the new developer was required to file an amendment to the condominium’s offering plan in which it was designated as a “sponsor” with respect to the units it was selling, as well as signing a required certification that it believed the offering plan to be complete and accurate. In 2014, after the new developer had sold all of its apartments, the condominium’s board sued the developer, claiming that it was responsible for the almost $4 million cost of correcting building defects resulting from the original construction of the condominium by the original sponsor.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. used a two-step process to defeat the board’s claims. First, it moved in Brooklyn Bankruptcy Court to enforce the provisions of the original sponsor’s Chapter 11 Plan which discharged all pre-bankruptcy claims and specifies that the developer acquired their units “free and clear” of all claims against the original sponsor. Bankruptcy Judge Elizabeth S. Stong issued an Order in Aid of Plan Confirmation absolving the new developer of all pre-bankruptcy liability.

Second, armed with the Bankruptcy Court ruling, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. moved in Brooklyn Supreme Court to dismiss the board’s claims with respect to any pre-bankruptcy defects. The board argued that because the new developer had signed the sponsor’s certification required by the attorney general’s condominium sale regulations, it had adopted the original sponsor’s promise that when units were sold, the units and common areas would be free of construction defects. Justice Knipel disagreed, dismissing the board’s complaint to the extent that it sought damages for construction defects for work done before the developer obtained the units in the Chapter 11.

Although this case arose in the bankruptcy context, the result is important to all bulk purchasers of condominium units, because they are each required to sign the attorney general’s certification as a successor sponsor before they can offer units for sale. By rejecting the claim that the certification renders the successor liable for the original sponsor’s promise of non-defective construction, Justice Knipel’s decision protects purchasers of units from financially troubled sponsors from taking on the unknown, often unknowable, risk that the building has hidden defects.

Adam Leitman Bailey represented the client in both Bankruptcy and Supreme Court.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Secures Largest Condominium Construction Defect Settlement in Brooklyn History

In 2018, unit owners at The Oosten, a luxury condominium in Brooklyn’s Williamsburg neighborhood, faced a financial crisis as Chinese developer Xin Development accrued over $250,000 in unpaid common charges, leading to legal actions such as liens filed by the board’s attorney, Adam Leitman Bailey. The Oosten, designed by Dutch architect Piet Boon, featured upscale amenities but suffered from unpaid charges, a lawsuit by a contractor owed approximately $470,000, and a $1.3 million lawsuit by Halstead Property Development Marketing. Additionally, discrepancies and construction defects plagued the building. A group of unit owners hired Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., which discovered a major Martin Act violation involving an engineer’s report from China. With the Attorney General’s involvement, a four-year battle with the sponsor ensued, ultimately resulting in a landmark settlement covering identified issues. This rare settlement saved residents from costly litigation. A board member had this to say about Adam and his team:

“Adam is a very good strategist and I think that’s kind of his superpower, if you will. I think he knows the law, but he’s able to also explain it in a way that’s simple to people who are maybe not legal experts. […] Adam not only is very strong on kind of the high level strategy for what we’re gonna do, he is also getting in the weeds when he needs to and getting involved and using his kind of contact network and levers with the Attorney General and such to kind of make things happen. […] He also has a great team. I mean, any firm has to have a great team. So like Rachel and Courtney were the ones to kind of get deep in the weeds. You know, Adam’s like a pretty no nonsense guy who just tells it like it is, but some people you can’t do that with. You have to understand how to address them in a way that’s gonna resonate with them and that’s a real skill. […] I really think it goes back to kind of Adam and his ability to build a great team that can support him and move things forward to the end goal. And our end goal was always to get a settlement agreement, to get one that was large enough to fix all or substantively all of the issues.”

APPELLATE LITIGATION

Making New Law, Appellate Division Finds That Condo Board Not Liable for Repairing Newly Constructed Building and Finds That Obligation to Repair Remains with Sponsor; Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Victorious at Trial Level and Appeal

On November 8, 2009, the Appellate Division ruled that a building’s developer and not a condominium board shall be responsible for making repairs to a newly constructed building. In Lorne v. 50 Madison Avenue LLC, a unit owner sued the board of directors for failing to remediate a construction defect. A unanimous Appellate Division dismissed the condominium board from the lawsuit while determining that the sponsor was the proper party for the lawsuit. It should be noted that this is a case of first impression regarding the responsibilities of the sponsor and board of directors of a newly constructed building.

The court also found that where the unit owner sought to take matters into its own hands and remediate a construction defect, the board acted reasonably in asking the unit owner to sign the same alteration agreement that other unit owners had to sign. Finally, by ruling that the floor defect was, as per the condominium documents, a structural defect, and the obligation of the sponsor to repair, the court rebutted the unit owners’ attempt to shift repair responsibility to the condominium board.

NEW CONSTRUCTION

In a Decision of First Impression, the Brooklyn Supreme Court Held That a Successor Condominium Sponsor is Not Liable For Building Defects Caused by the Original Sponsor’s Construction of the Condominium

The Bayard Views Condominium, a 62-unit luxury building overlooking McCarren Park in Brooklyn, was completed just before the 2008 recession, which forced the original sponsor into Chapter 11 bankruptcy after it could sell only 25 apartments. In 2011, a subsidiary of the property group of the successor sponsor, a Brooklyn developer who was uninvolved with the building’s construction, was able to purchase the remaining 37 apartments under the sponsor’s Chapter 11 Plan.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law and Prevails at the Appellate Division in Adverse Possession Case of First Impression

In a case of first impression in the Second Department involving the law of adverse possession, the Appellate Division has ruled that pursuant to the amendment to Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law §543, de minimus non-structural encroachments are, as a matter of law, deemed permissive and non-adverse and cannot support a claim for adverse possession.

In Hartman v. Goldman, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. successfully represented the Goldman family before the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division. The plaintiffs, adjacent property owners, claimed that they were entitled to adversely possess or own a strip of land which was on the Goldman’s’ property.

The plaintiffs claimed that they relied on a survey obtained in 1987 when they bought their property. They argued that for more than twenty years they planted new foliage and shrubbery, landscaped the strip, mowed the lawn, and installed lights thereon. Although they later found that the survey was incorrect, they nonetheless maintained that they satisfied the elements necessary to obtain the strip by adverse possession.

The Appellate Division, however, rejected these claims.

It explained that while prior to the new law being enacted, “the existence of the kinds of non-structural encroachments and maintenance listed in RPAPL 543 could be considered in determining whether the plaintiff had shown that he or she usually cultivated, improved, or substantially enclosed the land…”

In other words, under the previous adverse possession law, our adversary had a good chance of winning their case. But since our adversary decided to apply the new law to the facts of the case in its pleadings and motion, the court would not disturb this decision and would apply the new law for the first time in a Second Department case.

However, under the “plain terms” of the new law, “plaintiffs’ planting of foliage and shrubbery, and landscaping and lawn maintenance are de minimis and deemed permissive and non-adverse,” and cannot be used to claim the Goldman’s land.

In addition, the court found that the new law (RPAPL 543) also applied to the driveway lights. As a result, the plaintiffs’ claims alleging that they obtained the disputed strip by adverse possession were dismissed in total.

Adam Leitman Bailey prevented the Goldman’s property from being absconded and prevailed in all aspects of the litigation.

Adam Leitman Bailey argued the case before the State Supreme Court and Jeffrey R. Metz argued the appeal in front of the Appellate Division. John M. Desiderio drafted a substantial portion of the briefs.

TENANT REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails on Appeal in Favor of Holocaust Survivor Rejected From Cooperative Board and Makes New Law Giving Non-Shareholder/Contract Vendee the Right to Sue

Sinensky vs. Rokowsky

Supreme Court, Appellate Division: First Department

Holocaust Survivor Wins Legal Battle, New Home

THERE’S A HAPPY ENDING in sight for a disabled Holocaust survivor who has been living as a virtual prisoner in his Brooklyn home.

After two years of legal wrangling, tomorrow Chaim Indig, who uses a wheelchair, is set to move into a handicapped-accessible co-op in Premier House - a luxury Midwood building whose board initially had turned him away.

“He indicated he’s excited about the move,” said his daughter, Shevie Sinensky, who must speak for Indig because Parkinson’s disease has robbed him of the ability to talk. “I am grateful to God he will finally have a comfortable home to live the rest of his life in dignity and comfort.”

The Borough Park house he’s vacating has ten steps outside the front door, so he can’t get out without a stretcher and two men to carry it.

The apartment where Indig, 83, a survivor of Auschwitz, and his wife, Sara, will live has handicapped-accessible elevators. He can join other elderly residents who sit outside the building in wheelchairs, Sinensky said. He also will be able to get fresh air on his own terrace, and use a wheelchair-accessible shower instead of taking sponge baths.

Indig gets to live the rest of his life in freedom and peace, without the bars of his Holocaust prison or the steps of his house,” said Adam Bailey, who had been the Indigs’ lawyer.

Son-in-law Gary Sinensky bought the $412,500 co-op at 1401 Ocean Ave. for Indig after a legal settlement with the Premier House board. The seller was board member Solomon Rokowsky, who purchased the flat after Indig was turned down in his bid to buy it in March 2004.

The Indigs and Gary Sinensky had sued Rokowsky and other board members, alleging discrimination against Indig because of his disability.

Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice David Schmidt dismissed the discrimination charge. But an appeals court reversed that decision, and Schmidt pressed everyone to make peace.

“The judge used his good offices to bridge the gap between the two parties,” said Israel Goldberg, a lawyer for the board. “There’s no animus.”

lcroghan@nydailynews.com

It should be noted that besides the tremendous victory for this man who had been through so much, this case also established a new precedent. This case allowed a non-shareholder/contract vendee who is "not a party to the proprietary lease between the corporation and the seller" to have the standing or the ability to sue the board of directors of the cooperative. This ruling had been affirmed by the Appellate Division and has stood as a law in New York since October 11th 2005 and has not be reversed through today. So as they say bad facts make bad law, very good facts make very good law. This case has benefited hundreds, if not thousands, contract vendees in cases against boards.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails Against Trump Soho on Fraud Claims; Settlement Provides Millions of Dollars to Clients

“They cried “fraud!” — and now, a bunch of well-heeled apartment hunters will get a staggering 90 percent of their deposits back on posh pads they intended to buy at the troubled Trump SoHo condo-hotel because they relied on the developers’ “deceptive” sales figures. In a federal lawsuit settled yesterday, woulda-been buyers of 10 condos — including former French soccer star Olivier Dacourt — will get back 90 percent of $3.16 million (Not part of settlement total number is $5.197) total deposits they put down on $16.914 million worth of David Rockwell-designed luxury apartments, court documents show …

The disgruntled buyers were represented by Adam Leitman Bailey, the lawyer who has won large refunds on deposits for prospective purchasers at other high-profile condo projects.
Bailey said, “We are not superheros — we simply got Trump SoHo to do the right thing in a very difficult case.” – NY Post

As part of the firm’s efforts on behalf of wide range of individuals seeking to revoke or renegotiate their agreements to purchase new construction condominium units, we received a June 2010 filing made with the New York Attorney General from the sponsor of the Trump Soho Hotel Condominium. The filing disclosed that, in contrast to the statements that the sponsor had been making to the press and our clients that more than 60% of the approximately 400 Trump Soho units had been sold, only 62 units (just over 15%) were reported to the Attorney General as sold. In addition, the filing disclosed that the condominium’s staffing levels had been cut more than 25%. Based on this information, and additional investigation, in August 2010 the firm filed a suit on behalf of 15 plaintiffs against the Trump Soho’s sponsor and other individuals and companies involved in developing and marketing the condominium, including Donald Trump. The suit, filed in Manhattan federal district court, alleges that the false statements about Trump Soho sales constituted fraud under the federal securities law, the common law and New York consumer protection statutes. The suit also claims breach of contract entitled the plaintiffs to revoke their contracts and receive a full refund of all downpayments they have deposited.

Adam Leitman Bailey, John Desiderio, and Courtney J. Lerias are the team at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. representing plaintiffs from Europe, Asia and the United States.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Obtains Winning Settlement for Restaurant Struck by Crane on March 15th, 2008

A crane struck our restaurant. After seven months as the hottest restaurant in town, we were closed. Not only did our landlord tell us he was not going to fix our building, he also sent an eviction notice ending our lease. He said that since the crane accident demolished most of the building and caused casualties, he did not have to rebuild.

We knew we needed a strong and influential law firm and we needed one quickly. We interviewed many attorneys. Somehow, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. stopped the eviction. They even won an injunction not only stopping the eviction but also the demolition of the building. Because we had won the injunction, the developer bought our lease at a number we could not refuse.

From Time Out magazine:

When a crane collapse took down chef Todd Mitgang’s seven-month-old restaurant, Crave Ceviche Bar, last March, business was booming. Now—almost a full year after the website’s promised April 2008 reopening date and in the midst of a restaurant-unfriendly economy—The Feed checks in with co-owner Dino Andreakos, and finds that the future of the restaurant still appears nebulous.

“Our landlord attempted to evict us,” Andreakos tells us, “on the premise that the building had to be knocked down and rebuilt from the damage of the crane.” With the help of law firm Adam Leitman Bailey, the owners were “able to force a settlement” and give the Crave team “a chance to open in another location.” Having reached the settlement in October, the team’s focus is now on reopening.

Possible locations are scouted “two to three times a week, every week,” Andreakos says, alluding to sites in the downtown area and the restaurant’s former midtown neighborhood. When asked for an approximate reopening date, Andreakos explains, “It depends on what space we take over. If we find a place that requires relocating the kitchen, or doing major storefront work, that could take nine months to a year. If we find a turnkey operation, we could sign a lease and have the doors open in 60 to 90 days.”

Andreakos says that the menu—which featured a series of proteins “ceviche’d” in myriad juices, sauces and even champagne—will remain intact. As for the restaurant’s website, look for updates and a new reopen date to be posted soon, hopefully one with a more certain conclusion.—Charlie Fish

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was represented by Adam Leitman Bailey in this case.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Achieves Winning Settlement on Behalf of Co-op Sellers in Landmark Housing Discrimination Case

In a case of first impression, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. successfully represented the sellers of a cooperative apartment in a housing discrimination suit against their former co-op arising from the co-op’s failure to consent to a proposed sale of the apartment to elderly purchasers. When the co-op failed to approve the sale, despite the purchasers’ ample financial qualifications, the plaintiffs incurred damages because they were forced to find a new purchaser after the financial crisis struck and market conditions deteriorated. Advocating a novel legal theory on behalf of its clients, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. persuaded both trial and appellate courts to apply state and federal housing discrimination laws for the benefit of the sellers of the co-op unit, even though the prospective buyers were the parties denied housing.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. defeated the co-op’s motion to dismiss the case and obtained an affirmance of that result on appeal. The courts held that the plaintiff-sellers had standing to sue and stated a valid cause of action under the New York State Human Rights Law for damages resulting from age discrimination directed toward the prospective purchasers. The appellate court affirmed and further held that the plaintiffs had standing to sue under the Federal Fair Housing Act for damages resulting from nationality discrimination directed toward one of the two sellers.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. obtained documents and elicited testimony intended to demonstrate that the co-op’s proffered reason for rejecting the purchasers – purportedly a house policy requiring that apartments be used as a primary residence – was merely a pretext for the co-op’s discriminatory purposes. The case settled after the conclusion of discovery and prior to trial.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys Adam Leitman Bailey, John M. Desiderio, and Colin E. Kaufman represented the client at the trial level and Jeffrey R. Metz represented the client on appeal. Adam Leitman Bailey participated in the settlement negotiations that settled the case.

CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Breaks New Legal Ground With Appellate Victory For Attorneys’ Fees On A Stipulation

Luxury penthouse apartment suffering from various deficiencies sued for damages.

Issue on appeal was whether attorneys awarded per contract to the prevailing party constituted one party surrendering the minute the first witness was called to the stand. The developer argued that since it provided unit owner 100 percent of the amounts owner would have possibly won after litigation before the trial started, the owner should not be able to collect attorney fees under a provision in the contract allowing the prevailing party to collect attorney fees from the losing party.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. prepared for and reported to trial. The judge asked the plaintiff to call its first witness. The defendant developer objected to the trial and proffered a check all of the monies the plaintiffs could win at trial.

Trial judge sent the matter to a referee to determine legal fees and expenses. The referee found that since no trial commenced the plaintiff could not be declared the prevailing party in this action.

For the first time in a New York Appellate Court, the panel of judges reversed the lower court and determined that a trial was unnecessary to award attorney fees. The court declared that the “court must consider the ‘true scope’ of the dispute litigated and what was achieved within that scope. To be considered a ‘prevailing party,’ one must simply prevail on the central claims advanced, and receive substantial relief in consequence…”. “Although the received funds the sought through stipulation rather than through a judicial determination, they sufficiently prevailed on their claim. Accordingly, plaintiffs are entitled to recoup their attorneys’ fees, pursuant to the provision of the agreement allowing for fee to the ‘prevailing party.'”

Adam Leitman Bailey and John Desiderio represented Adam Leitman Bailey, PC at the trial level and appeal.

NEW CONSTRUCTION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Obtains Landmark Decision Denying Developer of a License in Order to Preserve the Safety and Interests of Adjacent Condominium Owners

In a landmark decision for New York real estate developers and owners, on August 2, 2018, a New York State Supreme Court Justice issued the first decision in New York history denying a temporary, limited license sought by a developer pursuant to Real Property Actions and Proceedings and Law (“RPAPL”) Section 881.

“[T]he Court is in agreement with the respondents in this matters. The Court is going to dismiss the petition for a license as it has been indicated that, although this may be solely about money, there are other factors with regards to the safety of the adjoining building that have not been addressed in this proceeding.

As set forth below, this historic decision dramatically impacts the rights of property owners.

By way of background, a notable developer (“Developer”) sought to construct a commercial building in Chelsea.

From the onset of its project, the Developer sought licensed access from the Board of Managers (the “Board”) of the adjacent condominium (the “Condominium”), and the individual owners of the units in the Condominium that would be most impacted by the proposed construction, in order to install protective measures required by the New York City Department of Buildings (the “DOB”).

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was engaged by one of the unit owners (the “Owner”) to negotiate the required protections for his condominium unit based on Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s extensive experience negotiating temporary and limited license agreements on behalf of both developers and owners.

During the course of negotiations for a license agreement between the Developer and the Owner, the Developer proceeded with the excavation of the property adjacent to the Condominium.

Unfortunately, the Developer made several erroneous assumptions regarding the structure and foundation of the Condominium. As a result, while the Developer was driving piles, which were to be used to support the future building, into the development site during excavation, the ground shifted under the Condominium.

As a result, the Condominium building significantly shifted, resulting in the Condominium building visibly leaning, and severe structural and physical damage to multiple units of the Condominium, including the Owner’s apartment.

The attorneys at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. immediately filed multiple complaints with the New York City Building Enforcement Safety Team (the “BEST Squad”), the special task force within the New York City DOB responsible for performing safety inspections of large construction projects, and for handling emergency situations.

In response to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s complaints, the BEST Squad sent an emergency team to review and inspect the safety and protective procedures used by the Developer to protect the adjacent neighbors. The failure of the Developer to take proper precautions to protect the Condominium was indisputable: the BEST Squad promptly issued an immediate stop work order against the Developer due to its failure to properly protect the Condominium.

Notwithstanding the severe damage, however, the Owner continued to negotiate in good faith with the Developer for license access to install protective measures.

These efforts were apparently viewed as too time consuming by the Developer due to the schedule of its project. As a result, the Developer commenced an RPAPL Section 881 action against the Owner, and the Board of the Condominium, for a court-ordered license to install the protective measures.

RPAPL Section 881 provides:

When an owner or lessee seeks to make improvements or repairs to real property so situated that such improvements or repairs cannot be made by the owner or lessee without entering the premises of an adjoining owner or his lessee, and permission so to enter has been refused, the owner or lessee seeking to make such improvements or repairs may commence a special proceeding for a license so to enter pursuant to article four of the civil practice law and rules. The petition and affidavits, if any, shall state the facts making such entry necessary and the date or dates on which entry is sought. Such license shall be granted by the court in an appropriate case upon such terms as justice requires. The licensee shall be liable to the adjoining owner or his lessee for actual damages occurring as a result of the entry.

Adam Leitman Bailey argued from this point, vigorously opposing the RPAPL Section 881 motion made by the Developer. Adam Leitman Bailey and Jeffrey R. Metz stated that while RPAPL Section 881 provides a license for access “as justice requires,” this case was one of the rare exceptions where justice required the denial of the granting of a license to the Developer due to the gross negligence and complete disregard exhibited by the Developer towards the Owner, and the other unit owners in the Condominium.

On August 2, 2018, the judge conducted a hearing on the issue regarding whether or not the Developer should be granted a temporary, limited license for access to the Owner’s apartment, and the Condominium pursuant to RPAPL Section 881.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. argued that the Developer and its agents had acted liked “cowboys,” by failing to consider the impact upon and risks to the Condominium, and unit owners, during its construction. The firm also argued that the Developer only was self-interested in completing its project, at any cost and/or harm to its adjacent neighbors. The judge agreed with Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

Agreeing that the Developer, and its representatives, had acted like “Cowboys,” the Court held as following:

Counsel I have my decision. I have heard everything, you know, and just for the sake of the record, we in this part have something called the word of the day. The word of the day today is cowboy.

Article RPAPL (sic) 881 allows property owner to petition for a license to enter the premises of an adjoining owner when such entry is necessary from making improvements or repairs to petitioner’s property and the adjoining owner has refused access. A proceeding pursuant to RPAPL (sic) 881 is addressed to the sound discretion of the Court. Matter of Van Dorn Holdings, LLC versus 152 West 58th Owners Corp.

In determining whether or not to grant a license pursuant to that statute, courts generally apply a standard of reasonableness. Matter of Board of Managers of Artisan Lofts Condominium versus Moskowitz, 114 AD3rd 491 First Department 2014.

Courts are required to balance the interests of the parties and should issue a license when necessary under reasonable conditions, and where the inconvenience to the adjacent property owner is relatively slight compared to the hardship of his or her neighbor if the license is refused. See Board of Managers of Artisan Lofts Condominium 114 AD3d at 492.

Although the determination of whether to award a license is discretionary. RPA Penal Law 881 provides that a license shall be granted by the Court in an appropriate case upon such terms as justice requires.

Based upon the arguments and the papers submitted today and the colloquy had by Counsel with this Court, the Court is in agreement with the respondents in this matters.

The Court is going to dismiss the petition for a license as it has been indicated that, although this may be solely about money, there are other factors with regards to the safety of the adjoining building that have not been addressed in this proceeding.

The Court will encourage counsel to continue to negotiate this particular agreement so that construction may continue and end in a reasonable time and that the safety and all of the monetary requirements as requested by the respondent’s be met. . . .

So the Court is denying the petition at this time.

Accordingly, this case illustrates the importance that both developers, who need access to adjoining properties, and adjoining property owners, who require protection from intrusive and potentially dangerous construction next door, need to be ready, willing, and able, in good faith, to negotiate the terms of the license agreements that will reasonably and effectively serve the interests of both parties.

This case makes it very clear that, while adjoining property owners may not impose unreasonable conditions to frustrate the legitimate needs of a developer, the developer may not proceed cavalierly without due regard for the legitimate safety concerns of the adjoining owner or for the judicial consequences of their actions.

Adam Leitman Bailey and Jeffrey Metz argued the motion while Jeffrey Metz and Joanna C. Peck drafted and participated in the preparation of the motion papers.

TENANT REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevents Eviction of Tenant and Wins Damages and Attorney Fees using Federal Law Discrimination Statute

The client installed a room air conditioning unit through a brick exterior wall, a violation of its condominium’s rules. No formal application was made to do so, although client spoke with a Board member about the possible use of such a unit. The clients were served with a Notice to Cure in 2006 and consulted Adam Leitman Bailey, PC. Rather than wait to fight an eviction, the firm moved to stay further enforcement proceedings and brought an action based on City, State and Federal statutes forbidding discrimination against persons with disabilities, based on the client’s severe allergies.

Preliminary proceedings went on for several years, during which the client continued to live in their condo unmolested. The case was successfully tried in 2011 by one of the firm’s partners. The court found not only that the client was protected by anti-discrimination laws and could keep their air conditioner, but that the Cryder House was required to pay the Feldmans’ reasonable attorney fees.

HOMEOWNER AND TENANT ASSOCIATIONS

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Lands Largest Condominium Settlement in New York History

Sky View Parc Condominum, Queens

In what has been hailed as “the city’s largest condo refund ever” (Curbed NY) and “a settlement likely to send shivers through the ranks of the city’s condo developers” (the New York Post), clients of Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., have recovered 75 percent of $5 million in down payments on $50 million worth of luxury apartments. The agreement, which has recouped $3.69 million plus interest for 118 buyers at the massive Sky View Parc complex in Flushing, is the largest settlement on record in New York under the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (“ILSA”).

The plaintiffs, hardworking individuals and their families, had hoped to purchase condominium units in the Sky View Parc Condominium to use as their homes. They each made substantial contract deposits in the expectation that they would be able to obtain mortgages on their purchases and with assurances that the Sponsor had lined up preferred lenders to provide financing. However, when the mortgage market collapsed in late 2008, mortgage financing became unavailable on new projects like the Sky View Parc Condominium, and the plaintiffs, now unable to close on their purchases, faced the loss of their contract deposits – often their entire life savings.

However under ILSA, a federal statute designed to assure buyers that they are fully informed of the risks they are undertaking when purchasing in a new development – a statute the sponsors simply ignored – each of the plaintiffs were entitled to obtain refunds of their hard-earned contract deposits. ILSA requires condominium sponsors to register new developments with the Housing and Urban Development department and to provide buyers with property disclosure reports. Many condominium developers, including the developers of Sky View Parc, did not comply.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., commenced the suit, captioned Sky View Parc Purchasers Association, et al. v. FTC Residential Company II, L.P., Case No. 10-CV-5252, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, in November 2010. The parties engaged in discovery until the spring of 2011, when settlement discussions ensued.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorney Adam Leitman Bailey represented the plaintiffs.

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Knowledge of Finer Intricacies of Complicated Overcharge Laws and Formulas Result in Massive Savings for Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Landlord-Client

New York City owners who participated in the J-51 tax exemption and abatement program have faced a surge of class action cases over the last five years that nonprofit tenant advocacy groups have brought. The crux of these class actions’ claims was that owners should suffer a rollback of rent to the rates charged years ago and return supposedly overpaid rent to the tenants. Underlying this was the claim that owners did not return apartments to rent stabilization following the 2009 Court of Appeals decision in Roberts v. Tishman Speyer Props., L.P. holding luxury deregulation of apartments unavailable in J-51 buildings. In 2018, the laws in this area were unsettled while many trial courts issued decision after decision that not only favored the tenants but allowed for an ongoing accumulation of interest on their money claims.

A long-time client of Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. fell victim to a J-51 rent overcharge class action case, but the firm quickly resolved the case on terms favorable to the owner at a time when the trial courts were issuing one pro-tenant decision after another that triggered the potential for massive damages against its client.

Immediately after its initial meeting with its client, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. began to strategize how best to proceed given the substantial size of the proposed class and the costs, the time, and the risks associated with aggressive litigation. Through aggressive advocacy in negotiations, the attorneys secured a settlement wherein the rents did not change and any overpaid rent was returned in accordance with a formula negotiated by the attorneys based on current case law.

The firm’s resolution of this case would later mirror the rent calculation formula set by the Court of Appeals on April 2, 2020, in the Matter of Regina v. New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal. Years before Regina, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. navigated the laws stacked against landlords and negotiated with reason to effectuate a settlement saving its client years in litigation expenses.

One person involved in the case noted, “Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. nailed it, with its incredible math aptitude, combined with its negotiation skills, possibly saving tens of millions of dollars”.

Adam Leitman Bailey, Dov Treiman, and Carolyn Z. Rualo of Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. represented the landlord in this matter.

APPELLATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law in the Area of Housing Discrimination

Under New York State law, it is an unlawful discriminatory practice to refuse to sell or rent a housing accommodation to any person because of race, national origin or age. The law has generally been applied to people who sought to rent or buy a housing unit. But does the state law apply to sellers of a cooperative apartment when a cooperative board denies their sale to otherwise qualified purchasers (on a pretextual basis) because they are elderly? And, in this circumstance, do the sellers also have a claim under the Federal Fair Housing Act against the cooperative?

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. represented a husband and wife who were denied the ability to sell. The lower court found that they could assert a claim of discrimination against the cooperative under New York State law but not under the Federal Law. In the Supreme Court and on appeal, the cooperative argued that neither law applied because only purchasers, and not sellers, were the protected party who had standing to assert the claim.

In a case of first impression, the Appellate Division, First Department found that Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s clients could assert claims of discrimination against the cooperative under both the state and federal law. In addition, the court ruled that the firm’s clients could seek punitive damages against the cooperative under the state law to the extent permitted by the statute.

Jeffrey R. Metz and Courtney J. Lerias represented the sellers before the Appellate Division.

APPELLATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails in Title Litigation Involving An Interpretation of the New York Recording Statute

Rivas v. McDonnell

Supreme Court of the State of New York; Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

My Story: The Importance of Title Insurance

I got the panicked call at about 7 PM one evening from Earl, a friend and fellow real estate attorney.

“Adam, I really, really screwed up, man,” he said, sounding out of breath. “I need help big time. I’m desperate.”

Earl went on to explain that he represented a buyer named Pura Rivas who was purchasing a two-family home from a seller named Alan. The terms of the deal were fairly unorthodox, since Alan had inherited the home after his father’s death. Because he had alcohol and money problems, the terms dictated that Pura give Alan a certain amount of cash at the time of signing, in addition to paying for Alan’s beer and food expenses for an additional six months through an account they opened together at the corner grocery. After six months, Pura would make another payment to Alan, and would then become the legal owner of the home. However, the parties agreed that Alan would live rent-free in one of the building’s apartments for the rest of his life. The signed deed would not be recorded with the county clerk’s office, but was instead to remain in Earl’s safe deposit box until the six months had passed and Pura made the final payment.

“However,” Earl continued, “I just found out that Alan had already sold the building to someone else before he sold it to Pura. This previous purchaser knows about the deal with Pura and may have already had his closing. He may have even sold the home again, himself! What do I do?” I paused for a moment—and then I began delivering commands like I was avoiding rapid gun fire. “Even though she hasn’t paid for and does not have title insurance, get your title company in line at the clerk’s office at 7AM tomorrow morning. It opens at 9 AM, so you should be first. Remember that it usually takes two weeks for the office to record a deed, but if you hand deliver your deed in person and have it recorded while you wait, we may be able to beat the second buyer to the recording finish line. As you know, under the law, the first to record without notice of a prior sale becomes the rightful owner.”

I suggested we also visit the disputed property to learn more information about this alleged sale. I knew that if we were going to obtain any evidence about the fraud, we needed to do it now and not wait until the second buyer lawyered up.

Earl picked me up the next evening and we headed to the property. When we got out of the car, the second buyer—an imposing man named Dewey—approached us and asked what we wanted. Dewey announced that he was the rightful owner of the property, holding papers in his hand. While I don’t remember what was said next, I do remember Dewey taking a shot at my face with his fist. It certainly wasn’t the hardest punch I had ever taken, but I hit the ground anyway, hoping that the spectacle would cause him to be reasonable, or at least result in his arrest. This did not work.

But the plan of getting in line first at the recording office did. Two days later, the computer printout indicated that Pura’s deed recorded the purchase of her home 24 hours before Dewey. Knowing the law, we knew that we now had a decent chance of winning possession of the home. Within a few weeks, I was in court representing Pura. Because Dewey purchased title insurance, he was provided with a free attorney, and a very good one.

From that point on, things only got worse. The State Supreme Court judge ruled in favor of Dewey, stating that although we had recorded the deed first, Dewey conducted the first closing, and we had known about the transaction. We of course appealed immediately. My client’s life savings and dream of homeownership and Earl’s bank account were on the line—as a result of his failure to advise his client to record the deed in a timely manner. No title insurance company was going to act as savior and pick up the bill for Pura.

A few months later we received the decision from the Appellate Division in the mail. We had won. The Appellate Division decided that since Pura recorded her deed one day before Dewey, the fact that Dewey closed on the property before Pura was irrelevant—and Pura was the rightful property owner. Pura still owns her home and has paying tenants to provide extra income. I assisted her in evicting Alan from the property, as well as his friends that occupied the other apartment in the building. Pura and I still keep in touch and she recently reported that her daughter, Stephanie, will be attending John Jay Criminal College next year in hopes of becoming a lawyer. As for Earl, he joined his wife and has created a successful real estate practice. He has never failed to order title insurance again. In fact, Earl and Pura may be the best advocates for title insurance in the world as a result of their experience with this potential nightmare. As for me, the title company that hired an attorney for my adversary wound up asking me to represent them in a different case, and they still continue to be one of my favorite clients to this day.

While this story ends happily for Pura, the absence of title insurance could have turned it into an infamous buyer’s horror story if we had recorded the deed just one day later. Pura was extraordinarily lucky. I cannot stress enough how essential the purchase of title insurance is for all future homebuyers. Unfortunately, in the end, Dewey may have also come out a winner; if the title company did not prove his fraud, they would have been required to pay him the value of the property.

This story first appeared in the only home-buying book in the United States to discuss the importance of title insurance, Finding the Uncommon Deal.

COMMERCIAL LEASING SERVICES

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law and Secures Yellowstone Injunction Victory Saving Ground Lease Tenancy

In a stunning upset victory, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys recently made new law, thereby securing a Yellowstone Injunction on behalf of a tenant facing the imminent loss of its valuable ground lease tenancy after being accused by its landlord, a housing cooperative, of failing to carry the requisite property insurance, as required under the lease. The co-op landlord claimed it discovered the insurance default after it was denied coverage by the tenant’s insurance carrier. A personal injury action had been brought by an employee of one of the client’s retail tenants naming the co-op landlord and its managing agent as defendants.

Under well-settled New York law, Yellowstone injunctive relief is not typically available to commercial tenants accused of insurance-related defaults. The rationale being, that such defaults are impossible to cure because of the “universe of possible claims” that could arise during the time for which there is a gap of coverage. Nonetheless, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys understood from the outset that the slim but only chance of saving the tenant’s lease was by (i) skillfully distinguishing existing precedent, and (ii) demonstrating that the equities favored the tenant over the co-op landlord.

Never a firm to shy away from a challenging case and only days away from the notice to cure deadline, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys quickly got to work. They delved into the lease and insurance policy provisions, relevant case law, and the long litigation history between the parties.

After examining the file, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys learned of two crucial facts: the tenant did maintain proper insurance coverage only that the policy failed to name the co-op and its managing agent as additional insureds. In addition, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys discovered a Schedule of Supplementary Names, which was delivered by the insurance carrier along with the policy that listed the co-op as an additional insured, but which the co-op claimed was not part of the policy.

Armed with this information, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys, through expert testimony, established that the schedule of supplementary names is tantamount to an endorsement to the policy affording the co-op with the status of an actual insured. “Actual insured” is a higher and greater status that includes all the rights one has as a mere additional insured. Consequently, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. argued that under the terms of the insurance policy, the co-op’s managing agent was covered and agents of a named insured are automatically covered.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. further argued in the alternative that the tenant was entitled to a Yellowstone Injunction because both the co-op and its agent were de facto additional insureds under the policy. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. explained that under the terms of the insurance policy, the carrier must cover the tenant of any liability assumed by the insured under an “insured contract” even to parties not specifically named under the policy. The lease qualifies as such an insured contract as it contains a broad indemnification clause requiring the tenant to indemnify the co-op for any and all claims arising out of its negligence in connection with the premises. As such, no harm or loss could befall the co-op or its agent for the mere technical error of not specifically being named as additional insureds.

Beyond the legal justifications warranting injunctive relief, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. also argued that equitable considerations disfavored termination of the tenant’s lease. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. underscored to the Court the co-op’s bad faith in asserting a lease default for failure to comply with the insurance requirements as a pure money play designed to rid itself of a lower-than-market tenancy. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. pointed out an email from the tenant’s insurance carrier, dated just two weeks after the co-op served the tenant with the notice of default, on which the co-op attorneys were copied, reversing the insurance carrier’s decision and agreeing to provide coverage to the co-op for the personal injury claim. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. demonstrated to the Court that in bad faith, the co-op and its attorneys attempted to conceal this important fact at oral argument and in their court filings and even falsified the record to do so. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. further pointed out that the co-op conceded that it already had another tenant waiting in the wings, although nine years remained on the ground lease.

In a well-reasoned decision and a resounding victory for the tenant, the Court agreed with the arguments advanced by Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., granting the tenant a Yellowstone injunction enjoining the co-op-landlord from taking any further action to terminate the tenant’s valuable ground lease tenancy. The Court explained that the Yellowstone injunctive relief was warranted because the tenant had demonstrated coverage under the lease and that the most likely scenario is that the tenant’s carrier will cover any loss to the co-op or its managing agent arising from the personal injury action.

Very few law firms would have attempted a Yellowstone Injunction involving an insurance default, far fewer would have succeeded. By proactively pushing the envelope, persuasively writing and orally advocating, and diligently distinguishing existing precedent, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. not only secured an important victory for the client, but also created new law in New York. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. had carved-out an important exception to New York’s Yellowstone injunction jurisprudence involving insurance-related defaults.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys Jeffrey Metz and Dov Treiman represented the tenant in this matter.

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law, Evicting Long-Term Nuisance Tenant

In Cabrini Terrace Joint Venture v. O’Brien, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. evicted a forty-year tenant who had been creating a nuisance for his neighbors through his disgusting housekeeping practices.

Located in upper Manhattan, Charles O’Brien’s apartment was atrocious, the site of piles of clothing and other debris, and host to hundreds of vermin- some of whom escaped to invade neighbors’ apartments as well. The smell erupting from the apartment was immediately apparent and nauseating as one stepped off the elevator.

But, Mr. O’Brien, himself an attorney who advises tenants in the Housing Court, certainly knew his way around that court and produced piles of papers in both the Housing Court itself and in the Appellate Term.

Further working to O’Brien’s advantage was the court systems well documented preference for keeping long term tenants in their homes. In order to safeguard landlord’s interests, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. had to make a showing so convincing that not only would the court order an eviction, but the court would not give the tenant a chance to clean up to stave off that eviction, forcing the landlord to start the procedure all over again in a few months.

It was therefore necessary, not only to demonstrate that the tenant himself and his witnesses were unworthy of belief, but that the landlord’s witnesses were, in fact telling the truth- a sufficiently compelling truth to convince the court that the problem was not the apartment itself, but the tenant.

With Adam Leitman Bailey as lead trial counsel, and Carolyn Rualo second seated the trial with Dov Treiman and drafting memoranda, the team managed to do both on the trial level and the subsequent appeal.

On March 11, 2010, the Appellate Division, First Department handed down its unanimous affirmance of the Appellate Term in Cabrini Terrace Joint Venture v. O’Brien. At issue was an apartment described by all courts hearing the case as a place of roach and rodent infestation, clutter, offensive odors, and stacked newspapers and wiring in disarray. The court used this decision to clarify the law on post-judgment cure in nuisance proceedings, finding, “A posttrial opportunity to cure was properly denied upon a finding, based on the testimony and the trial court’s own inspection, that the nuisance conditions had existed over a substantial period, had not abated although tenant had been given ample opportunity to do so, and were unlikely to be abated.” Making new law, the court broke new ground, ruling that where the evidence is overwhelming that there is a nuisance and the tenant denies it, post-judgment cure is inappropriate because the tenant cannot cure what the tenant cannot appreciate.

As a result, despite 30 years of allowing tenants to cure any defects after losing at trial, this case changed that precedent and ordered an immediate eviction.

CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Cooperative Law on Repairs During Street Fight on the Upper East Side

Kahn v. 230-79 Equity Inc.

Twenty one years ago, Adam Leitman Bailey, took off its glove and went toe to toe in a street fight for a shareholder in an Upper East Side Cooperative that involved multiple causes of actions and published decisions. The shareholder prevailed in each battle but not before settling a long time debate of who was responsible for doing repairs in a cooperative unit.

In 2004, an Upper East Side cooperative was determined to evict our client in any way possible filing multiple causes of action and various cases. However, no one involved in the case ever thought that a ruling would come down in the Housing Court, which would be cited in 3 out of the 4 Appellate Divisions in New York State, as well as in 144 published decisions as published works.

A cooperative had to repair a resident’s dwelling no matter who caused the repair. This ruling, in favor of Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client was appealed to the Appellate Term and affirmed on appeal. The Appellate Term ruled in a case of first impression:

‘As statutory owner, the cooperative is obligated in the first instance to remove Housing Code violations (see, McMunn v. Steppingstone Mgt. Corp., 131 Misc 2d 340). It is premature to determine whether the tenant shall be ultimately responsible for the repair expenses under the proprietary lease since the fact issues concerning the source and cause of the alleged water leak have not yet been tried.’

The Attorneys at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Have Put Together Their Most Important Cases

Adam Leitman Bailey

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails in Title Litigation Involving An Interpretation of the New York Recording Statute

I got the panicked call at about 7 PM one evening from Earl, a friend and fellow real estate attorney.

“Adam, I really, really screwed up, man,” he said, sounding out of breath. “I need help big time. I’m desperate.”

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law, Evicting Long-Term Nuisance Tenant

In Cabrini Terrace Joint Venture v. O'Brien, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. evicted a forty-year tenant who had been creating a nuisance for his neighbors through his disgusting housekeeping practices.

Located in upper Manhattan, Charles O'Brien's apartment was atrocious, the site of piles of clothing and other debris, and host to hundreds of vermin- some of whom escaped to invade neighbors' apartments as well. The smell erupting from the apartment was immediately apparent and nauseating as one stepped off the elevator.

TENANT REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails on Appeal in Favor of Holocaust Survivor Rejected From Cooperative Board and Makes New Law Giving Non-Shareholder/Contract Vendee the Right to Sue

THERE’S A HAPPY ENDING in sight for a disabled Holocaust survivor who has been living as a virtual prisoner in his Brooklyn home.

John M. Desiderio

HOMEOWNER AND TENANT ASSOCIATIONS

After Real Estate Bust, a Legal Remedy for Buyer’s Remorse

Rebecca Schlanger used her life savings for a down payment on an apartment in Miami. Now she is suing to get her money back, under a 1968 federal law intended to protect buyers from unscrupulous developers and brokers.

In May 2008, a few months before the financial industry’s meltdown, the shipping executive Vasilis Bacolitsas signed up to buy a $3.4 million apartment at the Brompton, a luxury condominium tower being built on the Upper East Side.

The building went up as the real estate market went down, and Mr. Bacolitsas and his wife sought a $600,000 reduction in the purchase price. When they did not get it, they decided they did not want the apartment anymore. Their contract, like virtually all real estate contracts, required that they surrender the $510,000 deposit

But last month, a judge ruled that the couple could walk away with their money. It was one of a series of recent rulings in New York and other states that have enraged developers and given an escape hatch to buyers who signed contracts at the worst possible time, before one of the biggest real estate meltdowns in decades.

HOMEOWNER AND TENANT ASSOCIATIONS

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law and Prevails at the Appellate Division in Adverse Possession Case of First Impression

Jeffrey R. Metz

TITLE INSURANCE CLAIMS GROUP

A Street Fight in the Bronx over Land–Italians v. Irish. Then the Court Case over Who Gets To Use the Land–and a Winner.

This matter came to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. (ALBPC) at the beginning of 2017. The resulting decision issued by the Appellate Division on March 9, 2023 – six years later – shows how dogged investigation was important to finding the evidence necessary to persuade both the trial court and the appellate court to rule in favor of ALBPC’s client.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Preserves Six Million Dollars In Loans Made by Its Client

When the managing member of three real estate LLCs sought to refinance the existing senior debt, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client made loans totaling approximately six million dollars. There was also a mezzanine lender, whose agreement with the holding company for the LLCs, required its written permission for an activity such as a refinance. None was provided. Once the LLCs received and distributed the loan proceeds, the existing debt was retired, but the remainder, approximately 1.6 million dollars, went missing.

APPELLATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Wins Case of First Impression Regarding an Attorney’s Ability to Zealously Represent a Client Without Fear of Reprisal from the Client’s Adversary

Dov A Treiman

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Obtains Restraining Order to Lock Out Violent Illegal Short-Term Rental Operators with New York Police Department Assistance

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. secured an emergency temporary restraining order for its landlord client before Christmas, obtaining permission from a Supreme Court Judge to change the locks and seal the doors to three apartments with New York Police Department (NYPD) assistance to keep out violent illegal short-term rental operators.

First, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. secured a temporary restraining order enjoining a criminal enterprise operating a multiple-apartment illegal short-term rental scheme in our client’s Manhattan building. This order prohibited the tenants from advertising and renting the apartments for short-term use, and also from using, occupying, or maintaining possession of the apartments.

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law, Evicting Long-Term Nuisance Tenant

In Cabrini Terrace Joint Venture v. O’Brien, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. evicted a forty-year tenant who had been creating a nuisance for his neighbors through his disgusting housekeeping practices.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. Develops New Lease Language Regarding Electric Bicycles

While the green revolution may be doing much ultimately to make the planet more habitable, sloppy implementation of some of its features has had some tragic consequences. An unfortunate example has been the widespread adoption of electric powered bicycles. From an environmental standpoint, there can be little question that a well designed well equipped electric bicycle can provide a truly green transportation alternative for many people. However, the problem is not with the bicycles themselves, but with their batteries.

Jackie Halpern Weinstein

HOMEOWNER AND TENANT ASSOCIATIONS

Land Use Litigation Victory: Using Victory in Court, Proposing Legislation, Conducting Rallies, and Mobilizing Political Support and Media Attention, Save Harlem Association Obtains Winning & Avoids Settlement

One of the largest real estate developers in the United States, Kimco Realty, sent termination and demolition notices to the business owners who worked in Harlem’s longest building. All of the commercial tenant’s leases either had expired or had demolition clauses allowing the developer to evict the commercial tenants.

FORECLOSURES LITIGATION GROUP

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats A Borrower’s Brazen Attempt To Dismiss A Foreclosure Action On The Grounds That, Due To Her Own Delays, The Lender Failed To Hold A Foreclosure Sale In Accordance With RPAPL § 1351(1)

RPAPL § 1351(1) requires that a foreclosing lender hold a foreclosure sale within 90 days of the date that the lender obtains a judgment of foreclosure and sale. However, there are various procedural mechanisms a borrower can employ to delay such a sale. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. is well-versed in navigating the issues.

TENANT REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey Saves Carnegie Hall Tenants from Eviction; Obtains Massive Monetary Settlement and Free Apartment for Tenants

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. prevailed in representing some of the tenants in suing Carnegie Hall and the city of New York in order to halt a plan to evict them from the premises above Carnegie Hall.

Carnegie Hall wanted to provide space for renovations to expand the hall’s music education programs. According to the lawsuit, Carnegie Hall wanted to evict these tenants for “massive renovations” to convert the space “for its own use.”

Rachel Sigmund McGinley

NEW CONSTRUCTION

Sponsor’s Attempt to Avoid Liability for Construction Defects and to Limit Valid Claims of the Condominium Unit Owners Soundly Rejected by the Appellate Division

In a hotly contested dispute between the Board of a Condominium and the Sponsor of the Condominium, the Board brought suit alleging, among other things, that there were numerous construction defects that the Sponsor was obligated to remedy but failed to do so. The Board’s complaint noted that the defects included were not limited to the eleven most serious defects which were listed in the complaint. The complaint also referenced the engineer’s report which set forth other numerous defects. The Engineer’s Report and a listing of all the defects found were also provided to the Sponsor in discovery.

CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Secures Largest Condominium Construction Defect Settlement in Brooklyn History

CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Convinces Shareholder Not to Sue By Demonstrating that Leaks Flooding Unit Came from Different Apartment

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was retained by shareholder of an apartment in a prestigious NYC cooperative for help after her apartment allegedly caused leaks into two neighboring units.

Vladimir Mironenko

TITLE INSURANCE CLAIMS GROUP

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., Saves Family Business by Uncovering and Demonstrating That Previously Misinterpreted Century-Old Easement Prevented Business’ Trucking Route From Being Closed Off by Adjacent Development

A training facility for a professional sports team was being built in Brooklyn, New York. During the building process, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s clients who ran a business making plastics for garbage bags received an eviction notice. In existence for over 70 years, the owners were told that their trucks could no longer access their property to service the factory. They were also told that their trucks and materials needed to be moved, and combined with the lack of access, this was a death sentence for the family business. Scared, they turned to a New York Supreme Court Judge for assistance and were referred to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

COMMERCIAL LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Wins Summary Judgment in Commercial Breach of Lease and Guaranty Action; Obtains $1.6M Judgment for Landlord

Representing a commercial landlord, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. successfully sued the tenant and guarantors for unpaid rent in Manhattan Supreme Court, winning a $1.6M monetary judgment, which included rent arrears accumulated before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Overcoming Extremely Difficult Odds, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats Agency Governing Rent Deregulation, DHCR, Protecting Default Order of High-Income High-Rent Deregulation, Deregulating Apartment

This case highlights the mantra of never-ever giving up, believing in the case, and continuing to fight for our client’s rights to deregulate a rent stabilized apartment despite five years of delays and obstacles in multiple courts and agency proceedings. Finally, at the State Supreme Court, justice prevailed for our landlord-client who never stopped believing in Adam Leitman Bailey P.C.

Carolyn Z. Rualo

DUE DILLIGENCE

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Works Hard to Correct Previous Agent’s Application Errors and Help Business Keep Hundreds of Thousands in Tax Benefits

On December 6, 2016, Mayor de Blasio, the Department of Finance and Housing Preservation and Development issued suspension notices to owners of more than 3,000 multiple dwellings that failed to comply with 421a tax benefit requirements. The notices gave owners one year, until January 5, 2018, to correct their mistakes and omissions or suffer suspension of tax benefits – or worse, pay back the tax benefits previously reaped.

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Settlement Negotiations Save NYC Owner Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars in Rent Overcharge Class Action Case

Since the surge of tenant class action rent overcharge cases began circa 2017, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., has defended a number of the targeted NYC building owners who participated in the J-51 tax exemption and abatement program and did not, for one reason or another, immediately re-regulate units after the 2009 Court of Appeals decision in Roberts v. Tishman Speyer Props., L.P. The tenant advocacy group behind these lawsuits seeks not just a roll back of rent to the rates charged as far as back as 1984, but a return of rents paid above the rolled back rent for at least the four year period and at most the six year period preceding the complaint, depending on whether the suit predates the enactment of the Housing Stability and Protection Act of 2019.

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Knowledge of Finer Intricacies of Complicated J-51 Overcharge Laws and Formulas Result in Massive Savings for Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Landlord-Client

Danny Ramrattan

TITLE INSURANCE CLAIMS GROUP

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Secures Victory for Title Company in a 100-Year-Old Easement Action

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was recently retained by a Title Company in an action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Queens, where the plaintiff alleged that the title company failed to disclose the existence of a 100-year-old easement which severely depressed the value of his property. Instead of informing the title company, the plaintiff sold the property for a reduced value based upon the existence of the easement. The plaintiff then brought an action against the title company for breach of contract to produce a marketable and insurable title report, breach of fiduciary duty to deliver a marketable and insurable title, and for attorney fees.

TITLE INSURANCE CLAIMS GROUP

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Secures Landmark Decision for Title Insurer Establishing New Precedent Regarding a Title Insurers’ Obligations Related to Consolidated Mortgages

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was retained to defend a title insurer in an action where the lender sought declaratory judgment that a title insurance policy remained in full force and effect

FORECLOSURES

Good Deed Is Not Punished: Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Enforces Judgment In Lieu of Foreclosure and Revives Judgment Resulting in Client Recovering Over $2.5 Million from Former Friend

In a friendship gone bad, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was retained by clients (“Plaintiffs”) who had a Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale (“JFS”) that was over five years old. The Plaintiffs were not traditional lenders but rather were assigned the JFS and the underlying loan when their former friend (“Defendant”) requested a gigantic favor from them. The Defendant had a property that was in foreclosure and on the verge of auction. Defendant begged the Plaintiffs to purchase the underlying loan and judgment and to give him some time to either refinance the property and pay off the loan, or if Defendant was unable to get financing,

Courtney J. Lerias

FORECLOSURE LITIGATION GROUP

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Wins a Case of First Impression Under FAPA, Protecting its Client’s Mortgage in a Murky Legal Climate for Lender’s Rights

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was re- tained by a lender to navigate through the ever-changing fore- closure laws and save the lender’s ability to foreclose.

The lender’s foreclosure action was commenced in 2017. The lender moved for summary judgment, and the borrower cross-moved to dismiss, arguing that, per the Second Department’s holding in Bank of America, N.A. v. Kessler, 202 A.D.3d 10 (2d Dept. 2021) (hereinafter, “Kessler”), the 90 Day Notices served by the lender violat- ed RPAPL § 1304 for containing additional disclosures outside of the statute.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Preserves Six Million Dollars In Loans Made by Its Client

CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Received a Rare Injunction Stopping the Foreclosure Auction, Forcing the Sponsor to Abide by the Settlement Agreement Ensuring Millions Paid, and Both Condominium Unit and Numerous Parking Spaces at No Charge

In 2018, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was retained by a group of unit owners at a new construction condominium in Williamsburg, Brooklyn. The new building was advertised as a luxury condominium, and encompassed an entire block, with over 200 units consisting of one to three-bedroom units, duplexes, lofts, penthouses, and townhomes.

Eric S. Askanase

CONSTRUCTION LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Secures Record Multi-Million-Dollar Settlement for Residential Developer

Adam Leitman Bailey defeats adverse possession claim and sells entire plot of land to plaintiff.

As one of the experts in adverse possession cases in New York, I have never before seen an adverse possession case started by one party with the case ended by that party buying the land he was trying to steal. And that is exactly what happened in this case except that the adversary paid above market value for the land and set a County record per square foot for the sale’s price.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats Attempt to Use Adverse Possession Claim

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. defeated an Order to Show Cause brought by neighboring homeowners who sought to permanently enjoin Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s clients, a Westchester developer and its principal, from performing any development of an empty lot adjoining their property. The neighbors’ Order to Show Cause was filed as part of a lawsuit against the developer, as well as the Village of Scarsdale, seeking to prevent the developer from any use of his property pending resolution of the neighbors’ adverse possession claim in a related action to a portion of the empty lot.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Secures Historic Westchester County Real Estate Settlement Following Motion to Enforce

Earlier this year, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. secured an absolute victory with an unprecedented multi- million-dollar settlement of multiple lawsuits. These lawsuits were brought by owners of a neighboring property to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client in which they alleged an adverse possession claim against the client’s property, the last remaining vacant plot in a Westchester County multi-parcel subdivision.

Joanna C. Peck

LANDLORD REPRESENTATION

Unprecedented Negotiation of License Agreement with Large Developer Improves Structural Stability and Increases Value and Longevity of Adjacent Building

A prominent real estate holding company needed to negotiate an extraordinarily complicated license agreement for protections relating to a prominent university’s massive construction project adjacent to the building. The university’s project included demolition work, support of excavation work, foundation work, and the construction of a new building. In particular, the real estate holding company was extremely concerned that the university’s project could have dire consequences on its building due to the fragility and age of the building.

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (“RPAPL”) § 881 –Novel Decision Effecting the Rights of Developers – In New York City – Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats Emergency Application Concerning Permanent Encroachments Before Appellate Division

Following the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Tompkins 183 LLC v. Frankel, granting the developer of a residential and commercial building in the East Village a license to install permanent encroachments in the form of party wall tie-backs in the shared party wall that were necessary for the developer to proceed with the demolition of its existing building, the Adjacent Owner filed an emergency application before the Appellate Division seeking an immediate stay of the installation of such permanent encroachments by the developer.

CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE

Only on Park Avenue: Adam Leitman Bailey’s Counsel Leads to Successful Election and Turnabout on Important Issues for a Cooperative

In one of the most prestigious cooperative buildings on Park Avenue, the same board had been in office for almost two decades. The board had been making decisions that were harming the building including calling for the rebricking of the entire building costing millions of dollars and a sharp increase in maintenance.

Ben Rose

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Successfully Defeats Former Co-Op Board President’s Attempt to Enjoin Certification of Board Election Results and to Require New Election

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., secured a major victory for an incoming Cooperative Board defending against the former board president’s demands for a preliminary injunction to halt certification of election results in which she was ousted. After oral argument before the Queens County Supreme Court on the hotly contested dispute, the Court agreed with Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. and denied the plaintiff’s requests for preliminary injunctive relief in their entirety.

Stuart A. Klein

CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., On Behalf of Board, Defeats Preliminary Injunction by Self-Dealing Owner in Complicated Litigation

New York City’s extremely high density, especially in Manhattan, can yield high-stakes battles for even small spaces. When disputes about such spaces cannot easily be consensually resolved, legal “street fights” often develop rapidly, generating expedited proceedings. Successfully navigating these circumstances invokes an aphorism by British politician Charles Buxton: “In life, as in chess, forethought wins.” A recent matter handled by Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. exemplifies Buxton’s advice.

Andrew D. Cassady

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Defeating Discovery Motion in Sophisticated Non-Payment Proceeding, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Clears the Way to Collect Monies Owed

In a summary nonpayment eviction proceeding commenced against a residential tenant who had failed to pay rent for over a year, the tenant’s attorney sought leave to conduct discovery of documents and correspondence related to a misplaced defense, asserting that the building’s owner was barred from collecting rent for the duration of time the building was covered by temporary certificates of occupancy.

Brandon M. Zlotnick

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Real Estate Company Coup–The Ousted President Hired Adam Leitman Bailey to Restore Order and Regain His Managing Member Powers and Fight Off Investors Successfully

In early August 2023, Adam Leitman Bailey picked up a phone call from a prospective new client, the managing member of a real estate investment and development company. The potential client’s tale was most dire:

“I have been kicked out of the company I started. They shut off my email. A letter has been sent out that I am no longer with the company. They have cut off access to my bank accounts. I need your help.”

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails on Motion to Amend Complaint to Assert Federal and State Civil Rights Claims on Behalf of Real Estate Broker and Agent Against Brokerage

In an ongoing case in which Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. is representing a real estate broker and agent who are pursuing claims against their former employer for civil rights law violations and unpaid commissions, the EEOC issued right-to-sue letters permitting the firm’s clients to bring claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). The firm successfully moved to amend the clients’ complaint in the existing federal case to assert claims under Title VII on behalf of both clients, and under the New York State Human Rights Law on behalf of one of them.

CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Successfully Defeats Former Co-Op Board President’s Attempt to Enjoin Certification of Board Election Results and to Require New Election

Rosemary Liuzzo Mohamed

MORTGAGE FINANCE/BANKING

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Visits Emergency Room to Get Loan Closed

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

The purchasers were a lovely working couple purchasing their first home. Although the husband arrived early to the closing, his wife, who is a veterinarian, was called in for emergency surgery at the last moment and was not going to make it to the closing. It looked as if the closing would be adjourned and the buyers could lose their locked-in interest rate.

MORTGAGE FINANCE/BANKING

Overcoming Obstacles to Save Borrowers Thousands in Mortgage Tax

In the state of New York a New York Mortgage Recording tax is due and payable on each mortgage transaction both for purchases and refinances. The mortgage tax rate varies from county to county. In the five boroughs of New York City the rate is 1.8% on mortgage amounts under $500,000.00 and 1.925% on mortgage amounts above $500,000.00, a pretty hefty amount. For refinances, and sometimes on purchases, since the borrower has already paid the tax on the outstanding mortgage balance, the state of New York allows Consolidation, Extension and Modification Agreements (“CEMA”) which allows the borrower to save a portion of or all of the New York State mortgage tax by only requiring the borrower to pay mortgage tax on the difference between the new loan amount and the unpaid principal balance on their current loan. For example, if I currently owe $400,000.00 and my new loan will be $500,000.00, I will only pay mortgage tax on the difference of $100,000.00.

MORTGAGE FINANCE/BANKING

Update: Creative Methods for Closing During COVID-19

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. published an article in the fall about the creative methods its firm implemented to conduct closings during the spring and summer months. The transactional world continues to face many challenges with the increasing rise of new COVID-19 cases and the frigid winter months to come. This article is an update to the evolving methods that will be used amidst closing during the continued pandemic in New York.

Thomas Furst

PURCHASE AND SALES

Time of the Essence Closing: Amazing Preparation, Discovery of Another Home Buyer Purchased Spoiled Chances of Breaching Contract

This case was referenced to us by Seller’s attorney after he had declared “time is of the essence”.

The sale involved an upscale waterfront property in a resort Long Is- land town. At the time the matter was referenced to us, the sale had been ongoing for many months. Purchaser had undertaken a number of inspections and had made two separate demands for a $25,000 abatement of the Purchase Price. The first demand was based on certain physical issues with the house and Seller immediately acquiesced.

NEW CONSTRUCTION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Massively Reduces Alteration Fee Penalties Totaling Over 1 Million Dollars for Central Park West Apartments

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client, a co-op owner of two adjoining luxury apartments facing Central Park West, undertook a major renovation nearly four years ago, and is only now being completed. The alteration rules of this co-op are very stringent, and in particular the Alteration Agreement imposed very stiff fines for late completion. Furthermore, the longer the completion delay, the faster pace at which the fines accelerated. As it turned out, our client ran into massive delays, in part to COVID-19, supply-chain issues, and due to a Board, which at times imposed costly and time-consuming requirements- even changing rules in mid-stream.

NEW CONSTRUCTION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Creativity and Open Communication with Landlord Helps Commercial Bakery Survive/Profit During COVID-19

Our client is a very popular baker and seller of bread, bagels, and croissants. The bakery was founded in 1992 in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, just as a broader awareness and appreciation for quality artisan bread was blossoming on the East Coast. Its goal was to recreate the Old World traditions by using baking techniques and recipes that have barely changed in centuries; Not relying on preservatives or artificial ingredients, but on high quality, and the belief that bread is best enjoyed in its most simple and authentic form. It has been recognized for its dedication and quality by numerous well-respected publications.

Bonnie Reid Berkow

MULTI-FAMILY HOMES

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Represents Purchaser in Acquisition of Multifamily Property Eligible for “Qualified Opportunity Zone” Tax Benefits

Investors looking to defer capital gains tax may be able to do so by purchasing property located in a Qualified Opportunity Zone (QOZ). QOZs were developed by the federal government as an economic incentive tool to spur development in economically distressed areas. Under certain conditions, by investing in properties located within these zones, an investor may qualify for preferential tax treatment.

LICENSE AGREEMENTS AND RAPL

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Obtained Payment of an Access License Fee for an Owner in a Case of First Impression Where Both the Owner and the Commercial Tenant Were Seeking Payment of a License Fee

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was retained to represent a homeowner in Brooklyn in connection with negotiation of an Access and License Agreement with the developer of the neighboring property. The parties were able to negotiate all the terms of the agreement, but the Developer refused to pay the amount demanded by the Owner as a License Fee.

Zoe Tsicalos

HOMEOWNER AND TENANT ASSOCIATIONS

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Makes New Law and Prevails at the Appellate Division in Adverse Possession Case of First Impression

MORTGAGE FINANCE/BANKING

Lender Representation, CEMAs & Section 255 of the NY Tax Law

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. represents multiple prominent lenders in the real estate industry. Recently, the firm’s transactional department represented a lender in a deal that involved a Consolidation, Extension, and Modification Agreement (“CEMA”). A CEMA is an agreement between an individual’s current lender and their new lender. A seller can assign their mortgage to a buyer that is obtaining financing through a CEMA. The agreement combines two or more loans into one consolidated loan that reduces the amount of Mortgage Recording Tax that a New Yorker will have to pay.

Caleb J. Brown

REAL ESTATE LITIGATION

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats Summary Judgment by Long-Term Squatter Claiming Adverse Possession to Part of its Client’s Commercial Building

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s client is a commercial developer with numerous holdings throughout the City, including many former commercial properties that it has repurposed. In this case, our client purchased two adjacent buildings in Manhattan with the intent to combine them into a new property.

Solomon Chouicha

25 Years: Top Press Mentions

Day in the Life of: Adam Leitman Bailey

A New Yorker through and through, Adam Leitman Bailey, 53, actually moved from Bayside, Queens, to LA, of all places, when he was five years old. A self-described “Karate Kid” situation emerged, where he was the one with the Brooklyn accent. Bailey moved back to the East Coast — New Jersey more specifically — when he was 13.

Now a resident of the Upper East Side, Bailey, a graduate of Syracuse University School of Law, says he owns the largest real estate law firm, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., that’s owned by one person. Real estate, Leitman Bailey says, is “in chaos,” so business at his firm is hopping, with cases ranging from foreclosures, lien fights, partners battling over who has the right to make decisions, landlord/tenant disputes and class actions.

The Mystery Behind Real Estate’s Most Successful Law Firm, Adam Leitman Bailey

By Analina Smeraldi

I first became intrigued with Adam Leitman Bailey while reading the 250th issue of The Real Deal. In it, the publisher and editor discussed a series of cases where Bailey used an “ingenious” legal weapon that caused Congress to intervene and change the law. They further noted that The Real Deal’s largest advertisers asked the publication not to cover Adam Leitman Bailey and his law firm so his legal theories would not be exposed.

The 15 Most Fascinating New York Real Estate Cases of the 21st Century

By: Daniel Geiger

The Case of the Loophole & The Greek Shipping Magnate

Other than the J-51 lawsuit that upended Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village, perhaps no other case demonstrates how the city’s real estate market can hinge so seismically on legal technicality.
In 2008, the economy collapsed into a deep recession and the residential real estate market in the city came crashing down. The situation seemed especially dire and cruel for condo buyers who were under contract to purchase an apartment. Though these buyers hadn’t yet completed their acquisitions, they had pledged nonrefundable down payments of tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy apartments that were suddenly worth 40 percent less.

Public Enemy No. 1 for Developers

By Candace Taylor

No one ever accused Adam Leitman Bailey of having low self-esteem. “I think we may be the best real estate law firm of our time,” he says on a recent Monday morning, in a corner office at 120 Broadway plastered with framed newspaper clippings about his eponymous firm. At a table across the room, a summer intern uses a pen to edit the last chapter of his book, “The Insider’s Guide to Buying a Home and Making Money in Real Estate,” which is currently being shopped to editors.

Adam Leitman Bailey is to Real Estate Law What the iPod is to Apple

By Liana Grey

Last month, the real estate lawyer Adam Leitman Bailey received an award from the National Association of Real Estate Editors for his best-selling book, Finding the Uncommon Deal: A Top Lawyer Explains How to Buy A Home for the Lowest Possible Price.

Much of the how-to guide, which took Bailey six years to write and covers everything from short sales to distressed properties, was inspired by questions from clients, many of whom are property owners. “I answer their questions in the book,” he said. “A lot of the book was written on my Blackberry.” Last May, the 221-page guide climbed to the top spot on the New York Times best-seller list.

Luna Park Reaches for Stars With New Funding Plan

By Josh Barbanel

Luna Park, a large co-op in Coney Island in need of urgent building repairs, had been threatening to drop out of a state housing program for middle-income residents and to convert to market-rate apartments.

Instead, the board of Luna Park, a development with 1,576 units in five megalithic towers, closed on a $47 million bank loan on Monday.

It was the last piece of an aid package that also includes commitments for $21 million in government
grants and loans for the complex that will eventually be forgiven.

The Making of Adam Leitman Bailey

By John M. Desiderio

At the beginning of the new millennium, in an elevator at 26 Broadway, I met Adam Leitman Bailey. He explained that he bartered doing work for a landlord in exchange for office space. He had no employees and was single. He had more work than he could handle and asked me if I could help out with some of the overload. As such, I became the first member of the team. In 2000, he was not the pre-eminent statesman where each sentence out of his mouth sounded presidential. He spoke so fast that he ate his words trying to make a point, oftentimes due to having a photographic-type memory that can remember the smallest detail. And instead of the more circumspect attorney he would come to be, he would be happy to tell anyone his legal prowess.

“Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. – The Firm. One Office. The City.”

By The Lawyers Global

Adam Leitman Bailey opened the doors to the firm bearing his name, starting from scratch, on January 3, 2000. Bartering a small law office in exchange for providing legal services for his landlord, Adam Leitman Bailey pledged to become the best law firm in New York (…)

Born in Bayside, Queens (a neighborhood in the New York City borough of Queens) – New York, on April 27, 1970. He then moved to California at age five and later moved back to New Milford, New Jersey, where he graduated from New Milford High School. He graduated with honors from Rutgers University and Syracuse University College of Law.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails Against Trump Soho on Fraud Claims; Settlement Provides Millions of Dollars to Clients

By Steve Cuozzo

740 Park Ave.’s ‘Battle of Billionaires’ comes to an end

By Steve Cuozzo

The wealthy, elderly couple suing the co-op board of swanky 740 Park Ave. over noise and damage to their apartment can finally get some sleep.

Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Kathryn Freed on Wednesday ordered the board to limit work being done by Oaktree Capital mogul Howard Marks in his duplex apartment to daylight hours as specified in building rules and to end violations of the city noise code.

Adam Leitman Bailey Featured in “The Lawyers You Call 2012” Edition of The Commercial Observer

By: Daniel Edward Rosen & Daniel Geiger

August 8th, 2012

Every year, one of the most important real estate publications, The Commercial Observer, chooses from the best real estate attorneys in New York to profile. This year’s issue titled “The Lawyers You Call 2012,” features Adam Leitman Bailey and one of the firm’s landmark cases.

New York's Most Public Attorney

By Daniel Geiger

February 21, 2012

Adam Leitman Bailey strode into the lobby of his lower Manhattan law firm dressed in a dark blue suit and blue shirt, his extended cuffs all but dangling from his jacket. No sartorial misstep, Mr. Bailey would explain. The cuffs protruded noticeably beyond his jacket sleeves for a reason.

“It’s essential,” said Mr. Bailey, the attorney who last year garnered national attention as counselor for the Ground Zero mosque developer Sharif El-Gamal. “I’ve studied everything about the court room. It’s a subconscious thing, but this shows a jury you have nothing to hide.”

25 YEARS: Top 12 Published Articles

East Side Story

The made-for-Hollywood tale of a 16-year legal tussle to help a dedicated band of Manhattan “homesteaders” take ownership of the buildings they had moved into and begun to rehab.

Original Testimonial By Isabel Celeste:

Avoiding Usury: Determining the Maximum Interest That Can Be Legally Charged

By Adam Leitman Bailey, Dov Treiman, and Danny Ramrattan

Adam Leitman Bailey, Dov Treiman, and Danny Ramrattan discuss the limited applicability of usury defenses. They write: “In all, this area of the law is deceptively simple and the resolution of any case will require a close examination of the intricacies of the particular matter.”

New York imposes two separate rates for determining usury, a 16% rate for civil usury, and a 25% rate for criminal usury. On its face, it seems straightforward. However, when you investigate usury as a defense to charges of interest, you will uncover that it does not have the universal applicability so generally assumed and that there are many exceptions to the civil usury limit.

Permissive Encroachments Under Post-2008 Adverse Possession Law

By Adam Leitman Bailey and John M. Desiderio

Adam Leitman Bailey and John Desiderio discuss how New York Courts are interpreting the way in which RPAPL §543 (Adverse possession; how affected by acts across a boundary line), enacted in 2008 as a new addition to RPAPL Article 5 (Adverse Possession), has changed the law of adverse possession from what it was pre-2008.

In 2008, the New York State Legislature enacted sweeping changes to Article 5 of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (RPAPL) which governs the circumstances under which title to real property may be acquired by adverse possession. We have fully discussed the broad historic changes to the law in previous articles.

Title Insurance: Determining an Insured’s Loss and Calculating the Damages

By Adam Leitman Bailey

Even the most prudent lay person or attorney in private practice cannot inspect and discover each and every title defect that might affect the property. In order to protect against the risk of defects in ownership, title insurance is purchased, which is the most misunderstood, yet most valuable, forms of insurance in America.

The Sound and the Fury: Noise in Rentals, Co-ops and Condos

By Adam Leitman Bailey and Dov Treiman

As New York City experiences ever denser housing, the problems of noise resound ever more clearly. The noise has gotten louder for many reasons. First more families have chosen to reside in this city and one of the loudest and unrepresented group of violators has been screaming children.

Navigating Buyers and Developers Through New Construction Deals

By Adam Leitman Bailey and John M. Desiderio

A Comprehensive Guide to The Good Cause Eviction Laws

By Adam Leitman Bailey and Dov A Treiman

There has been quite a bit of attention in the Real Estate Industry paid to the “Good Cause Eviction Law” (GCE) signed into law on April 22, 2024. While the law gives a good deal of new paperwork for lawyers to complete when dealing with tenants, our office has developed procedures to make the increase in fees required by such increased paperwork minimal.

How To Run a Board Meeting

By Adam Leitman Bailey

Adam Leitman Bailey explains how using Robert’s Rules of Order can assist with effective and productive board meetings in real estate matters.

“The holding of assemblies of the elders, fighting men, or people of a tribe, community, or city to make decisions or render opinion on important matters is doubtless a custom older than history,” notes Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised (“Robert’s Rules”). This resulted in the need for rules of procedures to organize and obtain results.

Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act in a Nutshell

By Adam Leitman Bailey and John M. Desiderio

In 2022, the New York State Legislature enacted the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA), thereby amending several interrelated provisions of the Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR), the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (RPAPL), and the General Obligations Law (GOL), which affect how and when the statute of limitations may be invoked by defaulting borrowers to defeat foreclosure actions brought against them by their lenders.

Using the Judicial System to End the Foreclosure Crisis in New York

By Adam Leitman Bailey and Jackie Halpern Weinstein

Standard foreclosure proceedings have been put on pause. This article endeavors to provide instruction on how to cure one of the most frequently stumbled upon legal impediments to litigating these actions—the lost note. Many foreclosure actions are sitting stagnant for months, or even years, as a result of not only a reticent judiciary, but also the lenders’ sloppy record keeping and loss of documentation evidencing their standing to foreclose on a secured property. A lost note, however, does not necessarily foreordain a losing case.

New York’s Commercial Lease Defenses to Paying Rent

By Adam Leitman Bailey and Dov Treiman

New York is in one of its worst depressions since the American Revolution. Few landlords and commercial tenants have been completely immune from the governmentally imposed economic shutdown and COVID-19’s wrath. Not including what may have been negotiated in a commercial lease, there are three traditional theories under which commercial tenants could seek to assert entitlement to forgiveness of their rent: frustration of purpose, impossibility of performance, and force majeure.

One-Step Solution

By Danny Ramrattan

When common-charge arrears keep piling up with no end in sight, condo boards typically make a motion to foreclose and then another to evict. But there’s a workaround you may not know about.

Slow going. When unit-owners fail to pay common charges after a notice to cure, condo boards commence an action similar to what a mortgage lender would to foreclose. You ask the court to appoint someone to calculate the amount owed and for permission to auction off the unit in order to satisfy the money you’re due. Then comes the problem of eviction. Once boards become owners of a unit, they typically go to a landlord-tenant attorney and move to evict. But the process can take years, and in the meantime you’re not getting your common charges.

25 Years: Most Distinguished Honors

Adam Leitman Bailey Named One of New York’s Most Powerful Real Estate Attorney by the Commercial Observer

Chambers & Partners Ranks Adam Leitman Bailey as One of New York’s Top Real Estate Litigators since 2010

Super Lawyers Name Adam Leitman Bailey as Top 100 Attorney in New York

Adam Leitman Bailey Named America’s Top 100 Bet-the-Company Litigators for the Second Year in a Row

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Named to the 95th Edition of the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers

Adam Leitman Bailey Honored with Connect CRE’s New York & Tri-State Lawyers in Real Estate Award for Two Years in a Row

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Has Been Featured in the ‘Best Lawyers in America’ Edition for the Eleventh Year in a Row

Adam Leitman Bailey has been named as a Leading Global Real Estate Lawyer by Lawdragon

Best Lawyers Ranks Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. as a Top 10 New York Real Estate Law Firm With Less Than 30 Attorneys

Top 50 Women Lawyers

Adam Leitman Bailey Receives Highest Rating From Martindale Hubbell

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Voted as a Top 3 Real Estate Law Firm in New York

25 Years: The Top 20 Testimonials

MARIUS FORTELNI

“(Adam Leitman Bailey) is one of the most impressive individuals I’ve ever met. Honestly, I don’t think he has any weaknesses, you know, I think that man is made to do what he’s supposed to do, and he’s just set apart… there’s always some people in some fields, in sports, whatever it is, that are extraordinary, and Adam, if you were a golfer, you would be Tiger Woods.”

ANDREW HEIBERGER

“I think the best is ahead for him – I don’t think this is the tail-end of his success […] I know he has big aspirations and big ambitions and I know he is going to continue to excel”

CHAD AND VICTOR

“The aggression is there, you know that you have got really strong support. Whatever you need, they are going to fight” – Chad & Victor, Clients for over 10 years

MINDY AND KANDY

“I had been working in the real estate industry for many, many years and the top, top brokers and real estate developers in NYC had recommended hands down: Adam Leitman Bailey”

MILLA SLERTMAN

“As we all know, just mentioning Adam Leitman Bailey represents the building will make a lot of people run, and that’s a good thing!” Milla Slertman, Client for over 10 years, Board of Directors of a Condominium

DAVID MOFFITT

“Adam and the firm inspire confidence… they are considered top of the game in Manhattan…” – Manager at Invest Corp Interational.

MARC GELLMAN

“I thought Adam was a genius, it was just genius” – Marc Gellman, Director Of Design Development at Edison Properties, LLC

ANNA

“After I hired Adam, I actually felt safe and protected. He was going to be the best person to look after my best interests”

MICHELLE KELNER

“Adam is a good strategist. That is his superpower” – Michelle, Condo Board President

AHMET NEJAT OZSU

“I’m grateful that I was able to find Adam and he came through in what he promised”

ROBERT LOBEL

“They have an enormous both breadth and depth, which is of expertise, not just the depth, but the experience as well… you’re confident that there isn’t going to be any blowback or negative consequences once you close the deal.” – President of Bell Rock Development Group

VICTOR HSU

“I can highly recommend Adam, I think there’s very few people like him”- Licensed Real Estate Salesperson

NILESH SHAH

“Weaknesses? You guys are hard-working, that is your weakness”

ISABEL CELESTE

“I was told I could not be a homeowner…that I was the lowest of the low, that I didn’t have a right to live in New York City…but because of the expertise of Adam Leitman Bailey and his team, I became a homeowner yesterday” – Mother of Rosario Dawson: Squatter Turned Homesteader, Turned Homeowner

FRANCINE KELLMAN

“The firm holistically looked at us and really cared about the case.”

LYDIA AND CHRIS

“One thing, he never forgot the people who first was there as his clients from the beginning.” – Clients of Three Decades Share their Wonderful Experience with Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

ANDRE WATTS

“If you are in dire need of someone you can rely on and entrust, please choose Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.” – Vendor Manager for One of the World’s Largest Banks, Praises Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

BOBBY BEN SIMON

“Losing was not an option…we just went from one win to another” – Real Estate Developer

FIKRET DELJANIN

“Such a Developed Staff Here!” – President of Deljanin Properties

JEFF STERN

“His expertise and guidance were invaluable, and made me feel that I was, indeed, in highly professional hands and that he would fight tirelessly for my interests.”