By now many of us have either heard or read several articles written about compliance with the Executive Order 13224, titled "Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Persons Who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism" (the "Executive Order"). Although the probability of leasing or selling to any "Persons Who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism," is extremely low, the consensus among the real estate bar seems to be that it is better to comply with the Executive Order and protect yourself and your client rather than risk the stiff penalties and stigma that would follow by inadvertently violating it. It is apparent that the creation of a Landlord-Tenant relationship or a conveyance of a property interest would give rise to an obligation to comply with the Executive Order, thereby triggering all of the potential liability associated with violating it.
- March 31, 2005Michael S. Strauss and Thomas Pomella
In the landlord-tenant arena, the issue of whether terrorism insurance must be purchased has two frequently encountered aspects. In one factual pattern, a tenant of a single-user property is required by its lease to purchase certain insurance coverage to protect both its own interest and the landlord's. Does this lease provision include terrorism insurance, as well as other types of coverage generally required on the leased premises? In another factual pattern, tenants of a multi-tenant facility must reimburse the landlord for their share of the landlord's taxes, common area expenses and insurance premiums. Do those insurance premiums properly include the landlord's cost of obtaining terrorism insurance?
March 31, 2005Raymond J. WernerRecent important cases for your review.
March 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Recent cases of importance to your practice.
March 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |The Court of Appeals recently confronted a significant zoning issue: When, and on what terms, can the state or a state agency transfer to a private entity its exemption from local zoning restrictions? In Matter of Crown Communication New York, Inc. v. Department of Transportation (NYLJ 2/14/05, p. 19, col. 4), a divided court held that telecommunications towers erected on state land were immune from local zoning regulations even when the much of the space on the towers had been leased to private companies. The court's decision, however, raises as many questions as it resolves.
March 31, 2005Stewart E. SterkRulings of interest to you and your practice.
March 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |The Implant Information Project ("The Project"), located at www.breastimplantinfo.org, is a new Web site sponsored by the National Research Center for Women & Families, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that is dedicated to improving the health and safety of adults, teens, and children. It provides up-to-date information about the latest research on breast implants, so that teens, women, and their families have the information they need to make appropriate decisions.
March 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.
March 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Product failures are often investigated by official agencies. For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") will often report on automobile defects as well as traffic accidents; the National Transportation Safety Board ("NTSB") investigates aviation accidents, and the Coast Guard investigates maritime disasters.
March 31, 2005Lawrence Goldhirsch