Category Archives: Co-Ops

Coop Terminated Proprietary Lease for Objectionable Conduct

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

May Court “Second Guess” Board’s Decision? or Did Business Judgment Rule Apply ?

Proprietary leases for residential coop units often permit the Board to terminate a lease for “objectionable conduct”—an arguably subjective cause. In a recent case, the Judge in the Landlord & Tenant Part concluded that the “business judgment rule” did not apply to the facts before the Court. That determination was the subject of an appeal.

111-15 75th Ave. Owners Corp, a residential cooperative corporation, commenced a holdover proceeding against Min Fan and Thomas Pellegrino after the Board terminated their proprietary lease on the ground the tenants had engaged in objectionable conduct. Civil Court denied Owners’ motion for summary judgment, rejecting the argument that the business judgment rule applied to the coop board’s determination to terminate the lease, and finding that the determination was not entitled to deference because Owners had not acted in good faith. The Board appealed.

Continue reading

Subdivision Declaration Prohibited Daily/ Weekly/ Monthly Sublets: Court Decides if One Year Rental was Covered or Permitted

This was originally posted on the SGR blog.

Reported decisions abound relating to the violation/enforcement of the prohibition of short-term rentals of coop and condo units. But are those restrictions enforceable where contained in the declaration of a residential subdivision in which each singular property was separately and privately owned?

LG Lakeside Limited Liability Company, owned by Glenn and Laura Kupsch, completed the construction of a home at 6 Mayfair Drive in Bolton Landing, Warren County in early 2018/late 2019. The home is located in the Mayfair Resort subdivision on the shores of Lake George, with all homes in the subdivision subject to a Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions, Easements, and Assessments dated May 15, 2012, and amended on November 13, 2013.

Continue reading

Nattering Nabobs of Neighborly Nuisance: Coop Unit Owners Trade Noise Complaints

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

Residential coop living comes with adjacent neighbors and the concomitant sounds of nearby use and occupancy. But how much “noise” is too much “noise” so as to amount to an actionable “nuisance”. As a recent case illustrates, every “noise” may not rise to the level of legally cognizable “nuisance”.

Richard L. Getty, a musician and the lessee of a cooperative apartment, brought a Small Claims action against Mike Tolentino and Laura Tolentino, the owners of a vertically adjoining cooperative apartment based upon loud music being played. Getty claimed the Tolentinos played loud music that constituted a nuisance and interfered with his ability to profit from an Airbnb deal.

Continue reading

Unit Owner Bombarded Residential Coop with Frivolous Suits: Was Board’s Termination of Lease Protected by Business Judgment Rule?

This was originally published on the SGR Blog.

How much litigation is too much litigation? In a recent case, the Board of a residential coop asked the Court to find that a shareholder/tenant and her husband had overstepped permissible bounds in repeatedly bringing suits claimed to be frivolous and vexatious.

800 Grand Concourse Owners, Inc. sued to evict Charlene Thomson, the shareholder and proprietary lessee of Apartment 4L-N, and James Pettus, her husband who also lived in the apartment. The Board terminated the lease for “objectionable conduct”— including the filing of at least a dozen frivolous civil cases against the coop. The suits forced the coop to incur unnecessary and excessive attorneys’ fees, court costs, and the loss of insurance coverage. At least one court declared Thomson and Pettus to be “vexatious litigants” and prohibited the filing of further suits without judicial permission.

Continue reading

Court Asked to Enforce Demand to Inspect Park Ave Coop’s Books and Records:

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

Was the Request Reasonable? And Serving a Legitimate Corporate Purpose?

Unit owners at residential coops have both statutory and common law right rights to inspect corporate books and records. But, as a recent case illustrates, that right is not without limits. And that right may be abrogated where the demand is improperly motivated, on the one hand, and/or otherwise unreasonable, on the other.

James E. Cayne sought to compel 510 Park Avenue Corporation, a residential cooperative, to comply with his demand to inspect the coop’s books and records pursuant to New York Business Corporation Law § 624 and the common law of the State of New York.

Continue reading

Application of Business Judgment Rule: Was Business Judgment Implicated?

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

The Business Judgment Rule is familiar legal scripture that is often ritually invoked as a defense to claims by residential condo/coop unit owners against their boards of managers/directors. But, as a recent case illustrates, the Rule only applies if, in fact, a “business” judgment is involved.

Ayoka Foster sued 219-229 W.144th St. HDFC and members of the Board to receive the shares of stock to apartment six, as a beneficiary of Margie McCray, her mother, through decedent McCray’s Last Will and Testament.

Continue reading

Was Noisy Co-op Neighbor’s Uncarpeted Floor a Nuisance? Court Examines Panoply of Disturbing Claims

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

Residential cooperative living presents foreseeable “nuisance” challenges from contiguous neighbors, in general, and from people living directly above, in particular. But, as a recent case illustrates, not every annoyance—no matter how hard the facts—leads to injunctive or other relief.

Steven Dubin sought a Court order directing his upstairs neighbor, Brian Glasses, to cease his nuisance activities, to comply with their coops house rules, and to refrain from activities that deprived Dubin of the quiet enjoyment of his home. Glasser moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that there was a pending proceeding in Housing Court, and the complaint failed to state a cause of action.

Continue reading

Yet Another Fight About Exclusive Coop Roof Rights: Battle on 93rd St. Over Deck Space Next to Greenhouses

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

Access to and use of the roof of a residential coop is a much sought, cherished, and protected amenity. As a recent case illustrates, a claim to “exclusive” enjoyment of space on a roof can result in complicated and contentious litigation.

Nina Neivens brought an action individually and as temporary administrator for the Estate of Mary Neivens, her late mother, against 24-26 E. 93 Apts. Corp., a residential coop. She sought declarations regarding her rights to exclusive use of the roof of the coop’s building as the proprietary lessee of apartments 10AB and 10CD.

Continue reading

Business Judgment Rule Meets Unreasonably Withheld Consent: Did Co-op Board Have Basis to Deny Assignment of Shares?

This was originally posted on the SGR Blog.

It is axiomatic that, as night follows day, the Business Judgment Rules protects the Board of a residential coop from corporate and personal liability for good faith decisions made in the ordinary course of the coop’s affairs. But does it always? As a recent case illustrates, exoneration is not automatic where the proprietary lease expressly sets forth a different and higher standard.

Stuart B. Kotler, as Executor of the Estate of Gail Lowe Haymes, owned 510 shares 979 Corporation, a residential coop, allocated to apartment 2/3… Kotler wanted the co-op to transfer the shares and proprietary lease to the decedent’s daughter, Elizabeth Haymes Hempin. The co-op refused to approve the transfer. Kotler sued. The coop moved to dismiss.

Continue reading

Not Always Sublime “Up On the Roof”: Especially After an 8-Ton Chiller is Installed

This was originally published on the SGR Blog.

Roof access and use are among the most sought after, valuable, and fiercely protected amenities of residential coop living. As a recent case illustrates, litigation can go “nuclear” when roof rights are impacted by an imposing change.

Soho Plaza is a 34-unit “pre-war” coop that installed an eight-ton central (“chiller”) air conditioning unit on the roof directly above the penthouse owned by Richard and Cecilia Burbridge– who contended that the chiller made leaks into the penthouse significantly worse.

Continue reading