New York Real Estate Lawyers Blog

January 14, 2016

Have You Included Your Pet in Your Estate Plan?

Some of our trust and estate clients have asked us how to best protect their beloved pet in the event of their disability or demise. Pets can be just as important as children when planning one’s estate. These family members can be adequately provided for in a legal fashion. Traditionally, pets have been considered to be personal property, being no different than a car, furniture and the like. Our post addresses how personal property is typically distributed after someone dies. Some pet owners consult us to have their pets treated in a more personal fashion in their legal documents.

Practical matters should be considered such as selecting a potential caretaker and confirming with such person that they are willing to serve. The caretaker should be informed about the pet’s habits and preferences, such as how often and where the dog likes to be walked and pet food preferred. Contact information for the veterinarian, medical conditions and medications taken should be indicated. Funeral arrangements should also be made known, such as whether a cemetery plot has been purchased and whether funeral expenses have been prepaid. These practical matters are particularly important because the pet is unable to communicate, as a child may.

From a legal perspective, persons interested in legally protecting their pets should consult the attorney who is drafting their overall estate plan. Financial consideration to the caretaker needs to be arranged, while at the same time requiring the caretaker to perform certain duties on behalf of the pet in order to be compensated. A pet trust is a legally appropriate means to accomplish this goal. Such a document (or provision within a Will) would provide that a certain sum of money is to be set aside for the care of the pet by a particular person, which sum is to be released in particular intervals provided that the caretaker is assuming the duties expected or upon delivery of proof of payment of expenses on behalf of the pet.

January 7, 2016

Legal Issues Relating to Private House Rentals in New York

By Weiss & Weiss

Many of our firm’s clients own private houses in Westchester County, in Brooklyn (Kings County), the Bronx, and Queens County. These may be one or two family houses, and many of these houses are part of the rental market, rather than owner-occupied. Renting a private house involves many legal issues that may not occur in an apartment rental. These issues will the subject of this blog post.

The first issue relates to a written lease. Many apartment rentals use a standard form lease (which may be a rent-regulated form lease), or no lease at all. It is important when renting a private house to have a qualified attorney prepare a written lease specific to the property to be reviewed and executed by the tenant. The reason for this is that while there are standard Court practices for apartment rentals (particularly if the apartment is rent-regulated) house rentals are more specific and unique. Therefore, it is important for anyone renting a house to have a lease which will incorporate the specific requirements for the rental, as there are fewer standard terms. Some of the issues to look at are the length of the lease term, whether the lease can be renewed after it expires (as opposed to rent-regulated apartments, in which a renewal right already exists), the amount of the security deposit, responsibility for maintaining the property, and other terms which are specific to the house being rented.

For example, many houses have older appliances. The written lease needs to state who is responsible for maintaining the appliances, and who will incur the expense of replacing a major appliance which no longer works. Further, a landlord may specify who needs to have the appliance serviced and the allocation of repair expenses should be negotiated. Many landlord-tenant disputes in private house rentals relate to the condition of the appliances, as well as heat and air conditioning systems. The lease should specifically delineate each party’s rights and responsibilities for these conditions.

December 22, 2015

Happy Holidays from Weiss & Weiss

By Weiss & Weiss

December 11, 2015

Let’s Adjust: Calculating Amounts Due at New York Real Estate Closings

By Weiss & Weiss

Those people who are new to the real estate closing process in New York may not be aware that the amount delivered by the purchaser at closing is not as simple as the amount of the downpayment as subtracted from the purchase price. Adjustments are to be made for real estate taxes, vendors serving the property, and potentially remediating a seller-caused situation. Our real estate attorneys are experienced in making such calculations and in delivering the information to the parties in a timely fashion in order to prepare for closing.

The first adjustment to be made involves a credit to the purchaser for the amount of the downpayment. Another common adjustment is a $500.00 credit to the purchaser for the property disclosure statement. New York State law mandates that a seller complete a detailed questionnaire and deliver same to the purchaser. In the absence of the completion of such questionnaire, the purchaser is given a credit of $500.00 against the purchase price at closing. Certain sellers, such as estates, are exempt from the requirement to deliver a property disclosure statement and are not required to apply a credit at closing. Interestingly enough, it has become the custom for sellers to complete the disclosure questionnaire in upstate New York, while most sellers in the downstate area served by this firm typically do not produce such a statement. Our attorneys advise sellers concerning whether they should deliver such a disclosure in their specific situation.

Real estate taxes are another common source of adjustments between the parties to a transaction. In Westchester County, New York, the area in which our firm is located, there are two or three different types of real estate taxes, all of which cover different periods of time in the calendar year. For instance, County taxes cover the calendar year, January 1-December 31. School taxes cover the dates July 1-June 30. In those jurisdictions subject to Village taxes, the year is calculated from June 1-May 31. Even though the various real estate taxes cover particular periods of time, the taxes are not necessarily due on these specific dates. County taxes are due on April 1, with penalty for late payment being applied on April 30.

December 3, 2015

Landlord-Tenant Eviction Action in New York – Holdover or Non-Payment?

By Weiss & Weiss

Our firm frequently represents both landlords and tenants in eviction actions. Unlike many law firms who specialize in only representing landlords or only defending tenants, we recognize that valid legal issues and valid defenses may exist for both the party owning a given property and the party who may be renting the property. This blog post will discuss the basics of an eviction action, and may be viewed from the perspective of either a landlord or a tenant.

Eviction cases in New York State are classified as either holdover actions or non-payment actions. They cannot be both. When the landlord (who is usually called the “petitioner”) decides to file a petition for eviction in the appropriate court, the landlord’s attorney must decide whether the case is a non-payment action, or a holdover action.

A non-payment action is an action for eviction based on the tenant’s failure to pay rent as due. The rent due may be based on a written lease, or simply an oral agreement between the landlord and the tenant. For example, a tenant enters into a lease to rent a house for $6,000.00 per month. The tenant then does not make the rent payments as due. Our attorneys will usually advise the landlord not to proceed with a non-payment action until several months’ rent has accrued. The reason for this is that a tenant may always end a non-payment action by making payment. Once any and all rental arrears are paid by the defaulting tenant, the non-payment action will be dismissed by the Court and the tenancy will continue.

November 24, 2015

Happy Thanksgiving from Weiss & Weiss

By Weiss & Weiss

November 19, 2015

What’s in a Name? Name Change Petitions in New York State

By Weiss & Weiss

Our firm often receives inquiries from individuals who desire to legally change their name. People may desire to change their name for many reasons. Some want to avoid a name which may be linked to celebrities or individuals with unsavory or even criminal histories. Others may need their name legally changed so that it matches other legal documentation that they may have, such as a passport. Whatever the reason, this post will discuss the legal requirements required for name changes in New York State.

The first step in legally changing one’s name is to file a Petition in the Supreme Court in the county in which the individual currently resides. There are legal requirements regarding the contents of the Petition, including whether the individual has ever been convicted of a crime, judgments against the individual, pending litigation involving the individual, and information regarding child support and spousal support obligations. The reason that this information is required is that a person may attempt to evade legal obligations, such as judgments or child support, by changing their name. In order to prevent this, a name change Petition will not be accepted unless all information regarding such outstanding legal obligations is provided.

The Petition also has to provide the reason for the name change application. As discussed above, there are many valid reasons for such application. Once the Petition is complete, it is filed with the appropriate Court. The Court will also require a certified copy of the applicant’s birth certificate, showing the original name.

November 12, 2015

The Online Conduct of Cooperative and Condominium Disputes

By Weiss & Weiss

With the prevalent use of the internet, grievances against cooperative and condominium boards can spread like wildfire. The means used may be standard e-mail forwarded to all unit owners, a specifically developed Facebook or Google chat page, a publically accessible website, or another type of private intranet system. The New York Times recently published an article concerning the airing of disagreements online with an audience of all unit owners and the implications. In the past, if a neighbor had a complaint, she would approach one of the board members individually and directly, so that all unit owners would not be aware of the grievance. As an alternative, it is almost expected that a unit owner will raise concerns loudly and perhaps not so politely during the annual meeting. Such concerns will be addressed in front of all unit owners present.

Now it is not uncommon for unit owners to have a day-to-day online community, allowing for constant communication of all matters. Online discussions may concern such matters as whether a neighbor is willing to watch a pet while someone is away, whether someone wants to buy unneeded furniture or more serious matters concerning how the building is being run. The board may be publically attacked for building conditions or for the manner in which a financial transaction was handled. Modern online communities make it almost too easy for unhappy unit owners to gather strength. Some proponents argue that such an online community encourages transparency of the board. The board is continually required to state and justify their actions. Even though the board is legally required to be responsive to all unit owners and must follow the business judgment rule , the current expectation that every action of the board should be known and debated among all unit owners is likely to diminish the authority of a current board.

With the potential reduced authority of a board, the takeover of a board is a potential concern. Opponents of such online communities argue that such communities are developed merely for the purpose of such a takeover. Using the online method as an easily disseminated platform, it is easier than ever for dissident groups to develop allies and arrange for other unit owners to elect them to the board. Once opinions are readily shared, the slate of dissident candidates likewise develops more easily than in the past.

November 5, 2015

Arbitration as an Option to Resolve Legal Disputes in New York

By Weiss & Weiss

A recent series of articles in the New York Times discusses the growing prevalence of arbitration in resolving legal disputes. This blog has previously discussed arbitration proceedings in the context of New York Yankees slugger Alex Rodriguez (hereinafter “A-Rod”), discussing his attempt to reverse an arbitration ruling which upheld his long suspension. As baseball fans are aware, A-Rod was unsuccessful in having his suspension overturned, and ended up sitting out the entire 2014 season, and returned for the 2015 season, leading the Yankees in home runs.

A-Rod aside, the issue to be discussed is whether arbitration may be a better vehicle for dispute resolution than the traditional court system. In arbitration, parties agree to submit a dispute to a neutral, third party arbitrator, rather than to the court system. The first issue is the arbitrator to be utilized. Many contracts will state that the dispute should be submitted to a local branch of the American Arbitration Association (AAA). The AAA will generally supply a list of arbitrators with expertise in the area of the dispute, and the parties are allowed to rule out any arbitrators who may have a conflict of interest.

Other agreements may allow the dispute to be submitted to a religious tribunal, such as a Beth Din. This usually occurs when the disputing parties are members of the same religious group and prefer than their dispute be heard by members of their group, rather than in the Court system. Of course, if one of the disputants is not a member of the group, they may feel that they are at a disadvantage when the dispute is heard. Another aspect is that a religious arbitrator may apply religious doctrine and scripture, rather than civil law, in making their decision.

October 29, 2015

Evictions and “Stuff” Left Behind by Tenants in New York

By Weiss & Weiss

Prior blog posts have discussed the possibility of terminating a lease prior to its legal end date. However, in a residential setting, such a situation is not always cut and dried. If there is no formal document, executed by both parties, terminating the lease, then the lease between the parties may still control the situation. This blog post will examine the different possibilities, and advise both landlords and tenants regarding the disposition of property left behind by a tenant.

Our first example would be when a tenant simply leaves the premises, but does not advise the landlord in writing that he is moving out. In such situations, the tenant may also leave behind personal property at the rented premises. The first question is whether the tenant has legally abandoned the property. If the tenant does not return the keys to the landlord (or their attorney) and state in writing that they are surrendering possession, then they are still considered a legal tenant and the original lease will still control the landlord-tenant relationship.

Even if it appears to the landlord that the tenant has moved out, in the absence of a formal surrender, the landlord will still have to legally evict the tenant. This means service of a Notice of Petition and Petition of Eviction, obtaining a warrant of eviction in Court, and then having the City Marshal or Sheriff serve and execute the warrant. This will give the landlord legal possession and allow the landlord to dispose of the personal property left behind by the tenant. If the landlord decides not to follow this legal procedure, the tenant could return, and claim that they did not formally surrender possession. The landlord in such a case could be liable for an illegal eviction, as well as the cost of replacing the disposed-of property.