Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Search

We found 1,600 results for "New York Real Estate Law Reporter"...

Landlord & Tenant Law
February 01, 2025
Yellowstone Injunction Denied Because Failure to Procure Insurance Is an Incurable DefaultLandlord Bound By Agreement Setting Market Rent At Pandemic Levels
Co-ops and Condominiums
February 01, 2025
In Tax Foreclosure Proceeding, Condominium Board Entitled to Recover Only Those Common Charges Covered By Its LienProprietary Lease Gave Co-Op Authority to Mandate Removal of Whirlpool
Real Property Law
February 01, 2025
Mortgagee’s Claim Time-BarredEasement By Prescription EstablishedHearing Necessary for License FeeQuestions of Fact About Right to Park Over Servient LandMonuments Take Priority Over Metes and Bounds Description
Landlord & Tenant Law
December 23, 2024
Commercial Tenant Not In Default
Co-ops and Condominiums
December 23, 2024
Count Invokes Business Judgment Rule to Uphold Fines Imposed By Co-Op Board
Real Property Law
December 23, 2024
Questions of Fact About Compliance With Mortgage Contingency ClauseMortgagee Who Purchased At Foreclosure Sale Failed to Establish Bona Fide Purchaser StatusSupreme Court Was Premature In Holding That Option Violated Rule Against Perpetuities
Development
December 23, 2024
Developer’s Taking Claims Survive Motion to DismissDEC Incorrectly Granted Permit to Expand Nonconforming Mining UseMemorandum of Understanding Not Binding on Subsequent Town Board
City of Yes: Housing Opportunity — A Little Bit Of Everything, Everywhere
December 23, 2024
New York City’s recently adopted City of Yes for Housing Opportunity (CHO) represents the most significant overhaul of residential zoning regulations in decades. The interplay between existing procedures and new provisions will likely generate significant interpretive questions and litigation as developers seek to take advantage of these opportunities.
Landlord & Tenant Law
December 01, 2024
Tenant Who Stopped Paying Rent May Not Recover DamagesDoctrine of Emblements May Entitle Tenant to Collect Damages for Loss of CropsInsufficient Evidence to Support Use and Occupancy ClaimSuccessor Landlord Liable for Predecessor’s OverchargesGuaranty Law Did Not Protect Guarantor When Tenant Never Closed
Real Property Law
December 01, 2024
Foreclosure Sale Bidder Entitled to Return of Down Payment When Title Was Not MarketableInadequacy of Price Does Not Establish Duty to Inquire About Fraud

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
    There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
    Read More ›
  • Supreme Court Asked to Assess Per Se Rule Tension in Criminal Antitrust
    In recent years, practitioners have observed a tension between criminal enforcement of the broadly written terms of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 and the modern Supreme Court's notions of statutory interpretation and due process in the criminal law context. A certiorari petition filed in late August in Sanchez et al. v. United States, asks the Supreme Court to address this tension, as embodied in the judge-made per se rule.
    Read More ›
  • Restrictive Covenants Meet the Telecommunications Act of 1996
    Congress enacted the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to encourage development of telecommunications technologies, and in particular, to facilitate growth of the wireless telephone industry. The statute's provisions on pre-emption of state and local regulation have been frequently litigated. Last month, however, the Court of Appeals, in <i>Chambers v. Old Stone Hill Road Associates (see infra<i>, p. 7) faced an issue of first impression: Can neighboring landowners invoke private restrictive covenants to prevent construction of a cellular telephone tower? The court upheld the restrictive covenants, recognizing that the federal statute was designed to reduce state and local regulation of cell phone facilities, not to alter rights created by private agreement.
    Read More ›