Legal Decisions…Simplified and Specific.
A distinguished panel of New York co-op/condo attorneys analyze recent NY co-op/condo decisions. Subscribers receive a monthly PDF Digest of these case summaries and takeaways, an Advance Sheet of co-op/condo court cases recently decided, and access to the searchable Tracker database.
Take a Test Drive for $130-Day Test Drive. Cancel Anytime.
The Specifics of Search Success…
Addressing the specific and unique needs of today’s niche community of New York's co-op and condo professionals, Case Law Tracker does the heavy lifting—combing through and drawing out the cases most relevant to your needs.
Case Summaries
Focusing only on co-op and condo cases, practicing attorneys in this field prepare case summaries and useful takeaways - helping you understand what the case is about so you can quickly determine if it benefits you.
Case View
Our Quick View feature enables you to instantly determine if the case is relevant to your needs and provides you with a fast click to the full details of the case including judges, case history, as well as an active slip op link to related court documents.
Monthly Digest & Monthly Advance Sheet
A pdf Digest of all co-op/condo cases added to the database is emailed monthly to you. Plus, to keep you up to date on what the courts have most recently decided, you'll receive, monthly, an Advance Sheet with case names, decision and docket links, judges, and brief decision excerpts.
Searchable Database
Speeding you to exactly what you need, our robust search offers: a simple quick search; dropdown menus to refine that search; and powerful filtering capability that lets you drill down even further by court, judge, residence, tag, and date.
Advisory Panel
Our experienced advisory committee, comprised of industry-specific experts who truly understand the issues that matter to you, write the case summaries. They know what you need to know and help you get to that information as quickly and easily as possible.
Case Watch
Emailed twice-monthly, Case Watch focus on providing insight on one particularly relevant case—clearly explaining what happened, why it’s important, and what lessons can be learned within. Case Watch reaches two audiences: lawyers who subscribe to the Co-op & Condo Case Law Tracker and Habitat Magazine subscribers (co-op and condo board directors, property managers and other industry professionals).
Case Notes See all
Case Notes provides insight on one particularly relevant co-op or condo case—clearly explaining what happened, why it’s important, and what lessons can be learned within.
First published: Aug 2025
Single Me Out? Not So FastTAKEAWAY Here, the court recognized that individual board members should not be subjected to litigation simply for serving on a board. To hold board members personally liable, plaintiffs must allege with specificity that they committed wrongful, fraudulent, or tortious acts beyond their role as board members. The Business Judgment Rule protects board members from liability when they exercise business judgment within their authority. This protection can warrant dismissal of lawsuits at the pleading stage, even when all allegations in the complaint are accepted as true for purposes of the motion. Being named as a defendant in a lawsuit imposes significant burdens on individual board members. Underlying decisions such as this is the (often unstated) recognition that absent such judicial protections……no one will want or desire to serve on a cooperative or condominium board.
Read full articleFirst published: Jul 2025
The Big ‘Don’t’TAKEAWAY Once again, the corporate documents rule and dictate the outcome. Don’t add conditions that are not set forth in the by-laws. Don’t disenfranchise your shareholder’s ability to vote for properly qualified candidates of their choosing. Don’t try to rely on the business judgment rule to justify non-compliance with the by-laws or the proprietary lease.
Read full articleFirst published: Jul 2025
Sick, Sore, Lame & DisabledTAKEAWAY For boards who govern in buildings where third-party workers are performing services, there are three major concerns: liability, indemnity, and insurance. The first concern, liability exposure, arises because under current law it is presumed that a building owner is liable when workers fall from heights during construction or maintenance work, regardless of who actively caused the accident. Indemnity, the second concern, is in the form of a written contract term often found in the agreement permitting contractors to do work or employ workers in the premises. These contractual terms require the contractor to protect the owner against claims brought by injured workers. Essentially, the contractor agrees in writing to step in and defend the owner, covering legal costs and damages when workers seek compensation under laws like Labor Law § 240(1). This indemnity provision serves as the owner's first line of defense against worker injury claims. The third concern, insurance, is more problematic. Contractors typically provide an ACORD 25 Certificate of Insurance (COI), typically issued by the contractor’s insurance broker. These certificates appear to confirm adequate coverage, but they contain a critical flaw: they don't reveal policy exclusions and endorsements that could allow the insurance company to deny coverage. Even worse, the COI itself states that it cannot modify the actual insurance policy terms. The lesson for boards is clear: before allowing any work to begin, boards must go beyond the standard certificate of insurance. Either the board’s attorney or insurance broker must examine the actual insurance policy provided by the contractor. This review should verify that no exclusions or endorsements exist that would allow the insurer to disclaim coverage when protection is needed most. Only through this thorough policy review can boards ensure they have the protection they believe they've secured through their contracts.
Read full article