Warren A Estis

December 06, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner at Rosenberg & Estis, and William J. Robbins, a partner at the firm, analyze a ruling that they describe as an excellent example of the complex issues - of lease language, legal principle, and economic and social considerations - which Civil Court judges frequently must confront in deciding cases arising under the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law.

By Warren A. Estis and William J. Robbins

12 minute read

September 05, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner at Rosenberg Estis, and Jeffrey Turkel, a partner at the firm, write that the Rent Stabilization Law is intended to protect tenants from "unjust, unreasonable and oppressive rents." But what happens, they ask, when a tenant overcharges his or her subtenant?

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

8 minute read

June 07, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner at Rosenberg & Estis, and William J. Robbins, a partner at the firm, analyze a recent case where the court upheld a residential co-op's termination of the lease of a shareholder who, over a twelve year period, "refused to remove a nuisance, repeatedly withheld rent without legal justification, and caused the co-op to engage in almost constant litigation."

By Warren A. Estis and William J. Robbins

14 minute read

April 01, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner at Rosenberg & Estis, and William J. Robbins, a partner at the firm, write: The issue of whether to accept rent once a notice of termination has been served is an important one for a landlord and its counsel. Any landlord is reluctant, of course, to forego money in hand. No landlord, however, wants to be penny wise and pound foolish, i.e., to take rent and then be held to have waived a termination notice.

By Warren A. Estis and William J. Robbins

11 minute read

April 06, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner of Rosenberg & Estis, and William J. Robbins, a partner at the firm, write that, when litigating a matter, many practitioners immediately focus on the issues of substantive law involved in the case. The merit of the underlying claims is what primarily concerns them. It is critical, however, also to pay attention to procedure, no matter how strong a case may be on the merits.

By Warren A. Estis and William J. Robbins

14 minute read

March 02, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner at Rosenberg Estis, discusses when a lawsuit should end, i.e., when is it too late for a litigant to submit "new facts" that might affect the outcome of a case?

By Warren A. Estis

9 minute read

January 02, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner at Rosenberg & Estis, and Jeffrey Turkel, a partner at the firm, review a recent decision where the majority saw a dishonest former landlord who had abused the stabilization scheme by installing an illusory tenant, and the dissent saw a tenant who was savvy in real estate matters and who was going back on her word to obtain a windfall.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

8 minute read

August 04, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner of Rosenberg & Estis, and partner William J. Robbins write that, in a recent group of cases, the Appellate Division, First Department, grappled with the issue of how to enforce agreements to postpone judgments of possession or make payments to tenants when they vacate, with the majority and dissent taking sharply divergent positions.

By Warren A. Estis and William J. Robbins

16 minute read

October 05, 2011 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis and William J. Robbins, partners at Rosenberg & Estis, discuss the Second Department's recent decision in Casamento v. Juaregui and the caselaw precedent the court used to substantiate its holding.

By Warren A. Estis and William J. Robbins

14 minute read

July 06, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Warren A. Estis, a founding partner at Rosenberg Estis, and Jeffrey Turkel, a partner at the firm, write that the Court of Appeals has ruled that owners of former Mitchell-Lama buildings completed on or before March 10, 1969 can apply for "unique and peculiar" rent increases under the Rent Stabilization Law with respect to any apartment which has had a vacancy since June 30, 1971.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

9 minute read