A Notable Result in a Broader New York Real Estate Litigation Practice
Albany real estate litigation attorney Justin W. Gray secured a decision annulling an improperly adopted condominium bylaw amendment, reflecting his broader practice handling property-related disputes across New York State.
In a significant real estate litigation ruling, the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Greene County vacated a condominium bylaw amendment restricting short‑term rentals, holding that the board of managers failed to follow the mandatory procedures set forth in the condominium’s governing documents. The court granted an Article 78 petition and annulled the amendment in its entirety.
The unit owners were represented by Justin W. Gray, Esq., Partner at Maynard, O’Connor, Smith & Catalinotto, LLP, whose practice focuses on real estate litigation and other complex property-related disputes throughout New York State.
Case Overview: Condominium Board Oversteps Its Authority
The case arose out of an attempt by the board of managers of Hunter Highlands II Condominium to adopt an amendment imposing a minimum 30‑day rental requirement, effectively eliminating short‑term rentals and imposing substantial fees and conditions on owners who rented their units. Unit owners challenged the amendment, arguing that it was adopted in violation of the condominium’s Declaration, By‑Laws, and Offering Plan.
The petitioners commenced a CPLR Article 78 proceeding, seeking to annul the amendment and enforce the procedural and contractual protections contained in the condominium’s governing documents.
Court’s Key Findings
In a detailed Decision and Order, Hon. Richard Mott, Justice of the Supreme Court, agreed with the petitioners and ruled that the amendment was invalid. The Court found that the condominium board:
· Failed to provide proper notice of a duly called homeowners’ meeting, as required by the By-Laws
· Improperly relied on email notice where the governing documents required written notice sent by U.S. mail
· Did not include a full statement of the proposed amendment with the meeting notice, a prerequisite to any valid vote
· Took action at meetings that were not properly noticed or authorized under the governing documents
Because condominium by‑laws and declarations function as binding contracts among unit owners, the Court emphasized that they must be enforced as written. Allowing informal notice or voting procedures would improperly render those contractual protections meaningless.
As a result, the Court annulled and vacated the recorded Certificate of Amendment in its entirety.
Why This Decision Matters in Real Estate Litigation
This ruling underscores several broader principles that frequently arise in real estate litigation:
· Courts will closely examine whether parties complied with the governing documents, contracts, and procedural requirements that control property rights
· Real estate disputes often turn on strict adherence to notice provisions, voting requirements, recorded instruments, and other formalities
· When those requirements are ignored, affected owners, investors, lenders, and other stakeholders may have meaningful remedies through litigation
More broadly, the decision reinforces that courts will not defer to actions that exceed contractual authority or disregard mandatory procedures affecting real property interests.
Real Estate Litigation Experience That Gets Results
This case is one example of Justin W. Gray, Esq.’s broader real estate litigation practice, which includes disputes involving ownership rights, contract interpretation, title and easement issues, land use conflicts, commercial and residential property matters, and other complex litigation affecting real property.
Mr. Gray regularly represents property owners, investors, businesses, and financial institutions in New York real estate litigation, including actions for declaratory and injunctive relief, contract-based property disputes, partition and title-related matters, and other proceedings in Supreme Court and related forums.