Commercial Real Estate

The Plaintiff engaged a real estate professional to assist in purchasing a 100-year-old multi-family property in a small beach community. A central issue in the case was whether the Plaintiff intended to occupy the property or lease it on a long-term basis or as a short-term vacation rental. Shortly after the purchase, the Plaintiff hired an unlicensed contractor to convert a former garage space into living quarters. The building department discovered the work and issued a red tag, halting all construction. The Plaintiff later sued the real estate agent for alleged nondisclosure and sought damages for lost rental income and other claimed losses. A key dispute involved whether the lost rental opportunity resulted from the contractor’s actions, which caused the renovations to be halted, or from the real estate professional’s conduct. The case was successfully resolved following a full-day mediation.

Successfully mediated a construction defect matter that presented itself pre-litigation. Claimant homeowner hired a design professional and general contractor to perform a whole house remodel. Part of the remodel included a full re-do of an elevated exterior deck. The designer created a new design for the deck that the builder then implemented. Shortly after the remodel was completed, the deck began to show indications that water was getting under the tiles and damaging the outer edge of the deck. The builder asserted the design of the deck edge caused the issue while the designer alleged the builder failed to properly follow the plans and specifications. Prior to mediation, a new design was developed by a 3rd party designer that corrected the problem, and the builder developed a scope and cost of repair that fully remedied the damaged deck. Using the new scope and cost of repair as a guide, the case was resolved after a full day mediation.

Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with a developer of low-income housing, which provided for a 25% rate of return, and the principal and interest were due and payable in 12 months. Eight months after the loan was made, the lender claimed that the loan also granted the lender a 15% interest in the property. The developer denied that the loan agreement was modified, and denied that the lender ever received an interest in the property. When the developer tendered the full amount to the lender, plus the interest, the offer was rejected and a lawsuit was filed. After a full day of mediation, the lender accepted a little more than the principal and interest due under the note in satisfaction of the lawsuit.

Successfully mediated dispute between commercial landlord and retail tenant stemming from non-payment of rent during Covid 19 pandemic. The tenant defended on the grounds that performance under the lease was excused on the grounds of impossibility, i.e. State and local health and safety orders prohibited the operation of the business.