News

THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING BOARD-APPROVED ALTERATION AGREEMENTS IN CO-OPS

February 24th, 2010 A recent New York Law Journal article discussing apartment alterations in co-ops and condominiums, and the importance of having board-approved alteration agreements, highlighted Babeli v. 7-11 East 13th Street Corporation, a 2003 cases involving a cooperative unit owner with such a board-approved alteration agreement. After moving for preliminary injunction, Ms. Babeli won a court order compelling her co-op to allow her to proceed with agreed-upon alterations. The court, reviewing the agreement the co-op board had made with the plaintiff, concluded that she should be allowed to connect her rooftop space to her apartment by a staircase as outlined in the agreement. Further, the co-op’s stalling in coordinating the completion of the alterations-in-progress were pretext for trying to force Ms. Babeli to purchase more shares for her rooftop space, and in part because she had to live amidst ongoing construction, plaintiff met the requirements for preliminary injunction. Ms. Babeli was represented by Mel B. Ginsburg.

CO-OP OWNER WINS RIGHT TO KEEP COMPANION ANIMAL UNDER THE 3 MONTH RULE

February 23rd, 2010 On behalf of a co-op owner, the firm’s motion for summary judgment was granted when we demonstrated that the co-op did not timely commence the proceeding under the requirements of §27-2009.1 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York (sometimes referred to as the “Pet Law” or “three month rule”). Vernon & Ginsburg, LLP represented respondents Roman & Valiantsina Portnov, whose open and notorious harboring of their dog had begun, the court found, more than three months prior to the landlord’s serving a notice of petition and petition, thus triggering a waiver of any no-pet lease clause under the Pet Law. “By waiting to serve the Notice of Petition and Petition after it first became aware of the dog’s existence, petitioner acted at its own peril, notwithstanding that it gave the respondents the benefit of the doubt,” Civil Court Judge George M. Heymann wrote in 2229-13 Apt. Corp. v. Portnov.. The court noted further that “[p]erhaps [the landlord] should have heeded the adage: ‘shoot first, ask questions later.’ Had petitioner taken the precautionary and affirmative steps of timely commencing this proceeding at the outset, the waiver provision of the ‘Pet Law’ would not have come into play.” The decision appeared in the decisions of interest section of the New York Law Journal on January 21, 2010.

RENT-STABILIZED TENANT WINS RIGHT TO KEEP COMPANION ANIMAL OF 7 YEARS UNDER STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS

February 23rd, 2010 In Elliana 76 LLC v. Spier, Ms. Spier’s Yorkshire terrier had lived at her apartment for 7-and-a-half years before the landlord attempted to evict her for breaching a no-pet clause. On behalf of Ms. Spier, we moved to dismiss the proceeding based on the statute of limitations for breaches of contract under CPLR §213, as well as waiver under §27-2009.1 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. As Housing Court Judge Peter Wendt found, the landlord was barred from maintaining the case by a six-year statute of limitations for breaches of contract. The proceeding was dismissed and the landlord ordered to pay the tenant’s legal fees. Ms. Spier was represented by Darryl M. Vernon of the firm.