Holdover Tenant Liable for Breach of Covenant Landlord's Acceptance of Rent for 20 Years Waived Right to Challenge Tenancy and to Prevent Exercise of Options to Renew DHCR's Decision Destabilitzing Apartment Upheld
Scope of Easement Included Right to Install Seasonal Dock No Easement By Necessity But Questions of Fact Remained About Prescription Claim Questions of Fact Remain About Effects of Drilling On Neighboring Parcel Condominium Not Entitled To Summary Judgment On Neighbor's Claim for Negligent Maintenance of Water Main
Fraudulent Conveyance Claim Against Sponsor Avoids Dismissal Unit Owner's Appropriation of Common Area Constitutes Continuous Trespass Not Barred By Statute of Limitations
Environmental Group Had Standing to Challenge Permit Town Could Not Deny Special Permit On Ground That Unit Owner Had Failed to Show Reasonable Need for Proposed Facility
Although pursuit of an appeal to the Federal Circuit may under some circumstances prove to be quicker and less expensive, appeals to district courts are becoming increasingly attractive given recent changes in the law and USPTO practice in defending these actions.
In ultimately rejecting the plaintiff's claim that the apartment buyers could be responsible for the condominium developer's breach of a contract recorded as part of the condominium's declaration, the court illustrated some important points about how contracts can run with the land, or otherwise impose liability on real estate buyers.
Appellate courts continue to use common sense when disposing of constructively fraudulent transfer appeals, as recent decisions show.
The court reasoned that the landlord's affidavit, together with the exhibits established prima facie proof that the tenant had been illegally using the premises and had acquiesced thereto.
Where it applies, Subchapter V has been a great success. But, much of that success was due to a temporary change to the law that allowed more companies to qualify for Subchapter V treatment. That change has now expired, taking with it the only viable avenue for many businesses to reorganize.
A recent Pennsylvania Superior Court opinion held that a commercial tenant was evicted from the leased premises rather than abandoning it and that, accordingly, the landlord could only recover damages for unpaid rent through the date when the landlord recovered possession of the leased premises, denying the landlord's claim for additional rent for the remainder of the lease term.
