• Home
  • About us
  • Capabilities
    • Condo, Coop, HOA Counsel
    • Litigation
    • Business Law
    • Technology
    • Real Estate
    • Employment Law
    • Tax Audits
    • Family Law
  • Insights
  • References
  • FAQ
  • Inquiry
    • Payment
Colbert LawColbert Law
Colbert LawColbert Law
  • Home
  • About us
  • Capabilities
    • Condo, Coop, HOA Counsel
    • Litigation
    • Business Law
    • Technology
    • Real Estate
    • Employment Law
    • Tax Audits
    • Family Law
  • Insights
  • References
  • FAQ
  • Inquiry
    • Payment

Business

Home Business (Page 10)
Condos Collecting against Owners with Assets

Condos Collecting against Owners with Assets

New York condominiums have a variety of ways to collect amounts owed by unit owners. If demands and being nice do not cause owners to pay their obligations, then condo boards have tools available to cause owners to pay.

If the unit owner is renting the unit, the condo can send a notice to the renter and demand that the renter pay its rent to the condominium until the arrears are paid. Some renters comply after receiving the notice but others do not because they are fearful of retribution by their landlord unit owner (which is prohibited by law). The condo can escalate the matter and bring suit against the unit owner and the renter to force the payment.

If there are common amenities, condos may be entitled to withhold those amenities until arrears are paid. So lack of access to health clubs, pools, parking, etc. may be just the medicine that the unit owner needs to clear their arrears. Careful consideration of the condo governing documents and applicable laws should be done by an attorney to make sure the condo is within its rights to withhold certain amenities.

Condo governing documents also usually contain a provision allowing the board to escalate the payment of a whole years worth of common charges. Certain notices are required and then the entire remainder of the year becomes due and owing by the unit owner. Concerning over this happening could cause a unit owner to pay.

Under governing documents, condos typically have an automatic lien over the common charges and other amounts due by owners to the condo. To put the world on notice that the lien exists, condo boards usually record a common charge lien against the offending unit in the land records. They’ll need to do this if the board decides to foreclose that lien. After recording, sending a lien to a unit owner sometimes is enough to get them to pay or at least start a dialog about a payment plan if the board will allow such a plan. Some do with terms built into the agreement like interest on what is essentially a loan, a confession of judgment which means that the condo gets judgment if the owner defaults on the agreement without having to go through a full blown court proceeding, and other terms that are favorable to the condo.

Another route for a condo board is to bring a money judgment action against the non-paying unit owner. At the end of the lawsuit which can be in a variety of courts depending on the amount due, the condo can get a judgment for money. Having the judgment in and of itself could convince the unit owner to pay or enter into an agreement regarding payment. Judgments are good for 10 years so the likelihood of collection spans a long period of time. Unlike the common charge lien which is against the condo unit only, the money judgment can be used to go after other assets owned by the unit owner.

Collecting against a judgment could be as simple as looking at the last check that the unit owner wrote to the condo and serving a restraining notice against that bank. Unit owners who don’t want to pay and have done some research on collection, may have already closed that bank account. Some try to evade collection by paying with money orders or in ways that do not disclose a bank name and account number. There are restrictions on restraining notices that have to be followed. If the condo doesn’t know which bank the unit owner uses, there are strategies to find them. Once restrained, the bank account can be executed upon and if owned with others, turnover proceedings can be initiated.

Other avenues for collection include going after non-liquid assets such as brokerage accounts and stock ownership, or from a business owned by the unit owner (NY Marshals can place a levy on the business, stopping the unit owner from collecting draws, bonuses, interest without paying the debt to the condo).

If the unit owner is working, their wages can be garnished. A NYC Marshal can garnish up to 10% of the owner’s wages. Just faced with the possibility of garnishment and their employer learning about their debt may cause an owner to pay his or her arrears with the money they are keeping under a mattress.

Another approach to collection is finding other real property owned by the unit owner and making sure the money judgment lien is recorded against the property in the land records. It’s similar to a common charge lien on the condo unit (which has higher priority that money judgment liens). The money judgment lien can be placed on other real property and foreclosures of that property can be pursued.

If the unit owner transferred assets to others to evade recovery, there are tactics to reverse transfers that are fraudulent conveyances and seize the assets to pay off the amounts owed. If money is owed to the unit owner by others, we can cause that money to be seized from the others persons or entities.

Another target for collection is personal property. I can’t tell you how many times a board member advises, the person is in arrears but they are driving a brand new car. The car could be leased and thus owned by a leasing company, but if the car, boat, motorcycle, art, jewelry or other personal property of value is owned by the unit owner then it is fair game for collection.

If all of the above doesn’t produce money to pay the arrears, discovery can be taken to learn about assets or other ways that collection can be successful. We can serve written questions that must be answered under oath. We can obtain a court order that they appear for a deposition to answer questions about their assets or employment. We can subpoena documents from them or others related to their assets.

Navigating the above is tricky and should be done methodically by experienced counsel. What’s nice about condos is that the condo governing documents generally contain a provision allowing the condo to collect attorneys’ fees and costs of collection. So the time and effort needed to collect ends up being charged back by the condo to the unit owner and is collectible as provided in the governing documents. Once unit owners realize this, they often want to cut their losses and resolve in some way that is favorable to the condominium.

Taking a Strong Position on Access Agreement Enforcement is Important

Taking a Strong Position on Access Agreement Enforcement is Important

`

Access agreements are routine in New York City construction. If the agreement is drafted properly with important provisions in the event of default including nonpayment is important. Escrows and upfront payment provisions are helpful as suggested in this article but a well crafted attorney fee provision in favor of the non-breaching party, and other provisions can be the difference between a difficult enforcement and an easy one. Properly crafting these access agreements so that these types of provisions are contained therein is imperative.

Wage Transparency Requirements

Wage Transparency Requirements

The way co-op and condo boards advertise job openings, recruit applicants and promote employees is about to undergo a radical change. Starting on Nov. 1, 2022, all New York City employers with four or more employees, including co-op and condo boards, must include a “good faith” salary range for every job, transfer and promotion opportunity that they advertise. As long as one of the employees works in New York City, the workplace is covered by this law. Covered employers must adhere to this law when advertising jobs that are performed either remotely or at the building itself.

The law governs advertisements for full or part-time employees and for independent contractors. Ads are defined as any written descriptions of available jobs, promotions or transfers in any medium — from an internet posting to a flier on a bulletin board. But the law does not require employers to create a written ad in order to hire for a job, nor does it prohibit hiring without using a written ad.

Information in a covered advertisement must include a “good faith” minimum and maximum salary range. “Good faith” means what an employer honestly believes it will pay the successful job applicant. A salary includes an hourly or annual rate of pay — “$15.00 an hour” or “$50,000 per year.” Salary does not include overtime pay, insurance, paid sick or vacation days, or other forms of commissions, such as tips or bonuses.

Open-ended salary ranges are not sufficient. For example, an advertisement that states a job will pay a “maximum of $45,000 a year” or “$18 an hour and up” does not satisfy the new requirements.

Employers who violate the New York City law may have to pay monetary damages to affected applicants and amend future advertisements. If an employer cures a first violation of this law within 30 days of receiving a notice of violation from the New York City Commission on Human Rights, it will not have to pay a civil penalty. But if an employer does not cure, it may have to pay a civil penalty of up to $250,000 for each uncured violation.

Professional, Civil and Criminal Risks when Attorneys Serve as Board Members

Professional, Civil and Criminal Risks when Attorneys Serve as Board Members

Many Coops, Condos and HOAs have board members who are attorneys. Attorney board members can provide valuable input as board members but have to be careful not to provide legal advice. They definitely should not be relied upon as the Board or association’s attorneys for several reasons that will be discussed here. However, the attorney board member’s experience and training can help with identifying legal issues, framing those issues for the board, and presenting the questions with clarity to the association’s outside counsel. The attorney board member’s legal experience likewise aids attorney board members in helping the board understand the import and implications of legal advice received, and in the board’s adoption and implementation of appropriate actions in light of that counsel.

Attorney board members have to be very careful distinguishing between giving legal advice in place of outside counsel, and using their legal education and/or experience to aid in their decision making as a board member and helping other board members make decisions.

First, if the attorney board member is not a member of the bar in the state in which the association is located, the attorney board member risks engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. So if an attorney board member is not admitted to practice law in New York, the attorney definitely should not be giving legal advice to the board as it constitutes the unauthorized practice of law which is a sanctionable offense by the bar often leading to suspension or disbarment in the states that they are admitted, but also constitutes a crime in many states. In New York, the unauthorized practice of law is a class “E” felony. As such, conviction for a first-time offender can land the person in prison for up to four years or on probation while also requiring the offender to pay fines, restitution and be subject to other conditions imposed by the court.

If board members allow a fellow board member to give legal advice to the organization and engage in the unauthorized practice of law, they risk criminal punishment as well for assisting in the unauthorized practice of law, damages and claims that may result from decisions made by the board based on the unauthorized attorney’s opinion’s or legal advice and the denial of insurance coverage by the association’s insurers if a lawsuit is brought against the board members.

Even if the attorney board member is licensed to practice in the state in which the association is located so that there is no unauthorized practice of law concern, there still is an inherent conflict of interest in the attorney board member providing legal advice to the association for which the attorney serves on the board. New York’s Rules of Professional Conduct contains complicated rules regarding conflicts of interest and when an attorney has a conflict of interest it must be addressed. Condo’s in New York also have annual reporting requirements concerning conflicts of interest which must be satisfied.

There is also an ethical requirement of competency of an attorney giving advice in the condo/coop/HOA law area. If an attorney board member gives legal advice that the person is not competent to give because they don’t practice in the applicable area of law, then the attorney board member is arguably not competent to give the legal advice to the board which could also lead to a grievance complaint or malpractice claim in the event the legal advice turns out to be incorrect.

Offering legal advice on which the board relies initiates an attorney-client relationship. When that advice is provided regarding issues on which the attorney board member will also vote and that will affect the attorney board member personally, a potential conflict-of-interest issue raises questions about the
independent legal judgment exercised by the attorney board member.

Additionally, a board member is required to discharge his duties as a board member in accordance with the board member’s good faith business judgment in the best interests of the association.  In New York a board is entitled to rely upon the advice of counsel in making business decisions, and by doing so helps to insulate the board from liability under the business judgment rule. When a board relies upon the advice of a fellow board member who is an attorney, especially when the attorney is not authorized to practice law in the situs state, there is arguably no protection afforded under the business judgment rule. At the very least your adversary will raise this against the board in arguing that the business judgment rule does not apply to the board’s decision or at least the attorney board member who was acting in conflict or worse, criminally.

An attorney board member can be a great asset for an association board, however, that is not an acceptable substitute for independent legal advice from a licensed New York attorney who is experienced in representing condos, coops and HOAs and their boards. The perils for the association and the board members are too great to take the risk.

People Falling Out of Windows

People Falling Out of Windows

Tragic. It happens in high rises and even in shorter buildings more often than you may realize. When the news picks up the story, instant attention is brought to a building and the board and management need to spring into action and be proactive.

Legal thinkers will immediately assess liability and preventative work that can be done now that it has happened in your building and the board may be on notice of a dangerous condition that should be rectified promptly. The absence of window guards when required is an example. Even when such guards are not legally required in the applicable apartment it’s a good wake up call to take a look and make sure apartments that are supposed to have guards on windows actually have them. That any required notices are being sent and follow up documentation being collected.

Insurance for the coop, condo or HOA needs to be notified. The board has to plan for the worst and be concerned about the possibility of a lawsuit even if the board and management didn’t do anything wrong.

Notification of residents of the event and assuring them that the board and management are on top of it should be considered. How to address or not address the media attention? How to help neighbors in your building cope with the tragedy? How to make sure the attention of the event doesn’t impact the building in any further negative way and how to go on from here? These are all areas that experienced counsel and management can help the board navigate.

Read about the all too often tragedy on the upper east side of Manhattan (https://nypost.com/2022/07/16/nyc-man-falls-to-his-death-while-cleaning-windows-of-his-park-ave-high-rise/). Something as simple as window cleaning leads to tragic fall.

NY Condo’s Can  Now Legally have Owners’ Meetings by Means of Electronic Communication

NY Condo’s Can Now Legally have Owners’ Meetings by Means of Electronic Communication

The Governor signed into law on June 30, 2022, a change to the Real Property Laws that govern New York condominiums. Effective immediately, boards, in their “sole discretion”, irrespective of what the bylaws say, can decide to hold owners meetings solely or partially by “means of electronic communication”. The law says that “the platform/service” is the “place of the meeting” and that boards can decide to hold the owners’ meeting completely by means of electronic communication, or both at a physical place and also using a “platform/service” that allows means of electronic communication. in that case, the board would give the owners an option of participating at the physical place and/or electronically. The law is not effective retroactively. Electronic voting is certainly going to make a world of a difference in condominiums and achieving quorum may not be impossible anymore.

At the end of 2021, the New York Legislature changed the laws allowing business corporations (most coops) and not-for-profit corporations (most HOAs) to have virtual and electronic shareholder and member meetings. Those law changes went a bit further than this Real Property Law change. The BCL and NCL changes also provided that “[m]eetings conducted partially or solely by means of electronic communications in reliance upon this paragraph and any member’s electronic participation in such meetings shall be subject to those guidelines and procedures as the board adopts, provided the board shall implement reasonable measures to: (1) verify that each person participating electronically is a member or a proxy of a member; (2) provide each member participating electronically with a reasonable opportunity to participate in the meeting, including an opportunity to propose, object to, and vote upon a specific action to be taken by the members, and to see, read or hear the proceedings of the meeting substantially concurrently with those proceedings; and (3) record and maintain a record of any votes or other actions taken by electronic communication at the meeting. The law goes on to say that “‘reasonable measures’ with respect to participating in proceedings shall include, but not be
limited to, audio webcast or other broadcast of the meeting and for voting shall include but not be limited to telephonic and internet voting.”

So, unlike most coops and HOAs, condos arguably don’t have to satisfy these additional requirements that the lawmakers left out of the Real Property Law change.

Reasonable Accommodation and Modification Notice Requirement Looming

Reasonable Accommodation and Modification Notice Requirement Looming

The state Legislature passed a law in 2021 that requires qualifying housing providers — including co-op boards and landlords — to provide written notice to their shareholders and tenants of their rights to reasonable accommodations and modifications. The new law also required the New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) to promulgate regulations regarding its notice requirements. It has taken almost a year for the DHR to accomplish this, but they have finally provided their rules.

And the deadline is looming. The notice must be given to existing residents by June 17th, and within 30 days of occupancy for all future residents.

On May 18, 2022, the DHR issued new rules regarding the required written notice that a qualifying “Housing Provider,” (i.e., “owner, lessee, sub-lessee, assignee, or managing agent of, or other person having the right to sell, rent or lease a housing accommodation…”) will have to provide to their existing and new tenants regarding their right to request a reasonable accommodation or modification. As a reminder, a reasonable “accommodation” is a change in rules and policies necessary to afford a person with a disability an equal opportunity to use an apartment, such as permitting emotional support animals in no-pet buildings, or assigning a parking space to a disabled resident who may not be next on the waiting list. On the other hand, a reasonable “modification” is a physical change to the building, such as installing ramps, automatic doors and grab bars.

Housing providers that are required to provide such notice include all co-ops, rental properties and other community associations that are renting out residential housing. For example, a condo board or homeowners association is not subject to the notice requirement — unless it owns a unit and is leasing it for home residency. Commercial tenancies are not included under the notice requirement.

The following are the notice requirements:

• The notice must be in 12-point font (or other easily legible font).

• It must include the telephone number and e-mail address of the property manager or other person responsible for receiving accommodation and modification requests. 

• It may be sent electronically, by email, fax or other means. Links are acceptable provided the notice can be downloaded and printed. 

• It must be posted physically, but posting the notice does not satisfy the requirement to send the notice to all existing and future residents. 

• It may be sent along with other documents, such as leases and application documents. 

• If you have a community website, you must post the notice or a link to it on the homepage of your website.

New Electronic Discovery Rules in New York State Court

New Electronic Discovery Rules in New York State Court

The New York State Unified Court System just adopted additional rules and guidelines in the Commercial Division for Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”) on April 11, 2022.  The goal of the revisions is to address e-discovery in a more consolidated way, modify the rules for clarity and consistency, expand the rules to address important ESI topics consistent with the CPLR and caselaw. 

Under the amended Rule 11-c, parties are required to confer regarding electronic discovery prior to the initial conference.[i]   The rule further provides that any topics upon which the parties cannot reach agreement are to be addressed with the Court at the preliminary conference.

The amended Rule 11-c also addresses efficiency and cost with respect to electronic discovery. The new rule adopts a cost-benefit analysis similar to the standard in Federal Court and requires that “[t]he costs and burdens of ESI shall not be disproportionate to its benefits.” Cost shifting can be a game changer in many cases if handled appropriately. To that end, the parties are required to consider “the nature of the dispute, the amount in controversy, and the importance of the materials requested to resolve the dispute.” The amended rule also encourages the parties to use technology-assisted review when appropriate, and the parties are required to confer regarding “technology-assisted review mechanisms” throughout the discovery period. Lastly, the amended rule adds a claw-back provision for inadvertently produced ESI that is subject to either attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine. This is extremely valuable as waiving the privilege by inadvertent disclosure otherwise could result in attorney liability or violation of professional responsibility.

The amendments also modify Appendix A to Rule 11-c—which previously only addressed non-party ESI.  The new Appendix A replaces the non-party guidelines “with new guidelines to cover all aspects of ESI, from parties and non-parties alike.”    Specifically, the new ESI guidelines (1) encourage early discussion of ESI and suggest that an informal meet and confer process is preferred to formal discovery or motion practice; (2) counsel parties to limit discovery requests to what is proportional to the needs of the case; and (3) encourage informal resolution of disputes regarding ESI.  The goal of these guidelines is to “facilitate the cost-effective, predictable, and fair adjudication of cases.”  The guidelines make clear that parties “should not use discovery of ESI for an improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation.” 

The modifications also include general guidance on a number of specific ESI issues, including:  (1) the importance of technical competence in e-discovery; (2) the obligation of counsel to actively assist in preservation, collection, search, review, and production of ESI; (3) defensible preservation and collection of sources of ESI; (4) processes for determining if ESI is “not reasonably assessable;” (5) processes for determining acceptable formats for ESI production; and (6) a claw-back provision for inadvertently produced documents.  

The remaining amendments primarily streamline the rules and correct references based on the amended Rule 11-c.  See more.

NYC Coops, Condos and HOAs –  Covid-19 Vaccine Requirements for Employees and Contractors

NYC Coops, Condos and HOAs – Covid-19 Vaccine Requirements for Employees and Contractors

New York City’s requirement that all employees who perform in-person work or who interact with the public must show proof of vaccination against COVID-19 prior to entering the workplace went into effect on December 27, 2021. See NYC Commissioner of Health and Mental Hygiene Order. This applies to all employers including cooperatives, condominiums, and homeowners associations. Boards and their management must deny access to any employees who have not provided proof of vaccination unless they have a religious or medical exemption. Requests for those exemptions should be vetted for authenticity and propriety. The City provided some guidance and a form that can be used regarding exemptions.

Boards and their management must bar unvaccinated employees withiout an exemption from the workplace building, and can fire or discipline the employee. Consulting with experienced counsel beforehand is suggested to keep the association out of trouble; especially with these laws coming and going.

There are exceptions to the general rule such as workers who work from home or whose employment does not involve interacting with others, or individuals who enter the workplace for a quick and limited purpose.

There are also record keeping requirements for the employers. All records created or maintained by the employer must be treated as confidential and stored in a secure location separate from an employee’s regular personnel file, and available to only those employees or employer representatives who have a legitimate need to access the information. There are also posting requirements for the employers that have to be made. The association has to post a certification of compliance with the law in a conspicuous location like a lobby.

There are fines that may be issued for noncompliance. Noncompliance with the Order can result in fines up to $1,000 per violation with escalating penalties if violations persist. It is not clear yet how vigilant the City will be with enforcement but we expect that there will be some enforcement in order to deter employers from noncompliance. But, the City has set up a whistleblower hotline so we except there to be oversight from that perspective at least.

A subtle gem in this law is a requirement that the associations keep a log book of requests to contractors who work in the building as to whether they have been asked if they and their workers are in compliance with the law, and the contactor’s response. The law doesn’t require the association to make the inquiry of the contractor but if it does, then the exchange must be logged. Contractors by the way, are not just building contractors, but contractors for residents incuding nannies and housekeepers.

Creative Solutions for Difficult Situations

Creative Solutions for Difficult Situations

  • 1
  • 2
  • …
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13

Recent Attorney Publications

  • When Contractors Lack Licenses: Key Lessons for Condos, Co-ops, and HOAs July 25, 2026
  • When Bankruptcy Won’t Stop Your Foreclosure Sale: What Condo Boards and Management Need to Know About Repeat Filers July 22, 2026
  • When Repetitive Filings Cross the Line: Lessons from Fulton v. Yameogo July 21, 2026
  • Condominium Boards: Why Being Aware of First Mortgage “Standing” Can Protect Your Community’s Bottom Line July 13, 2026
  • Winning the Common Charge Battle: How Condo Boards Prevail Against Defiant Unit Owners July 2, 2026

Contact Us

Send us a note and we'll get back to you promptly.

OFFICES

  • Manhattan Office
  • 315 Madison Avenue, Suite 4032, New York, New York 10017
  • 646.880.3000
  • 646.880.3048
  • Westchester Office
  • 44 South Broadway, 21st Floor, White Plains, New York 10601
  • 646.880.3000
  • 646.880.3048
  • Connecticut Office
  • 55 Post Road W, 2nd Floor, Westport, Connecticut 06880
  • 203.349.8100
  • 646.880.3048

Latest Publications

  • When Contractors Lack Licenses: Key Lessons for Condos, Co-ops, and HOAs July 25, 2026
  • When Bankruptcy Won’t Stop Your Foreclosure Sale: What Condo Boards and Management Need to Know About Repeat Filers July 22, 2026
  • When Repetitive Filings Cross the Line: Lessons from Fulton v. Yameogo July 21, 2026
  • Condominium Boards: Why Being Aware of First Mortgage “Standing” Can Protect Your Community’s Bottom Line July 13, 2026

© 2026 Colbert Law LLC Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Highend Logo

Manhattan Office

  • 315 Madison Avenue, Suite 4032, New York, New York 10017
  • 646.880.3000
  • 646.880.3048

Westchester Office

  • 44 South Broadway, 21st Floor, White Plains, New York 10601
  • 646.880.3000
  • 646.880.3048

Connecticut Office

  • 55 Post Road W, 2nd Floor, Westport, Connecticut 06880
  • 203.349.8100
  • 646.880.3048

OUR EXPERTISE

When Contractors Lack Licenses: Key Lessons for Condos, Co-ops, and HOAs

July 25, 2026

A recent NYC Civil Court decision (Fortes v. Decorating and...

When Bankruptcy Won’t Stop Your Foreclosure Sale: What Condo Boards and Management Need to Know About Repeat Filers

July 22, 2026

For condominium boards foreclosing on unpaid common charges,...

When Repetitive Filings Cross the Line: Lessons from Fulton v. Yameogo

July 21, 2026

Community association boards—whether governing condos,...

Condominium Boards: Why Being Aware of First Mortgage “Standing” Can Protect Your Community’s Bottom Line

July 13, 2026

When a condominium unit owner defaults on their monthly...

Winning the Common Charge Battle: How Condo Boards Prevail Against Defiant Unit Owners

July 2, 2026

Condominium boards and property managers face a unique,...

When the Neighbor Builds: What Condo and Co-Op Boards Need to Know

June 29, 2026

Construction in New York City is a fact of life, but when a...

Succession Rights in Limited-Equity Co-ops: Practical Lessons from Mutual Redevelopment Houses v. Manyevitch

June 12, 2026

Succession disputes are among the most sensitive and...

The Post-Settlement Trap: What Fiondella Teaches Co-op Boards About Stipulations and Continuing Habitability Claims

June 9, 2026

For New York cooperative boards and managing agents,...

The Derivative Action Threat: Why “Limited Common Elements” Present Litigation Risks for Condominium Boards and Managers

May 16, 2026

A recent decision by the Appellate Division, First...

Governance and Rule-Making in the Modern Condominium

April 27, 2026

Reflections on 10MSW17D LLC v. Bd. of Managers of 10...

Don’t Delay: Why Timely Enforcement of Common Charges is Critical for Condo Boards

April 15, 2026

A recent decision from the Supreme Court of New York,...

RPAPL § 881 Licenses, and Why Fee Reimbursement Is a Core Deal Term

April 13, 2026

Boards and managers of condominiums, cooperatives, and...

The 432 Park Decision: A Masterclass in Risk Management for New York Condo Boards

April 2, 2026

New York condominium boards and management companies operate...

Protecting Your Building’s Integrity: Lessons from Board of Mgrs. of the 80th at Madison Condominium v. 1055 Madison Ave. Owners LLC

March 31, 2026

As a condominium board member or property manager, your...

Press Enter to search · Esc to close