215.230.4900

Be Careful When You Challenge Your Condominium Association

Posted on July 5, 2016 by bwadmin

Reply

In a recently reported decision, the Commonwealth Court held that a trial court properly awarded a condominium association its attorney’s fees that totaled approximately $27,000.00 in lengthy litigation involving an action brought by the condominium association to collect assessments against an owner who refused to pay the assessment.

The facts in that case showed that the condominium association sent a delinquency notice to one of the unit owners. After the owner refused to pay its assessment, the association notified the owner that if he did not pay the fee and if the association brought suit, he would be responsible for paying the association’s collection fees including its legal expenses.

The association eventually filed suit in Philadelphia Municipal Court seeking to collect almost $4,000.00 in fees and costs. What followed was a lengthy legal battle where the unit owner resisted every effort by the association to collect condominium fees. At the end of a lengthy trial, the trial court awarded the association almost $27,000.00 to reimburse the association its attorney fees. The case is Arches Condo. Ass’n v. Robinson, 131 A.3d 122 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015).

Contact a Real Estate Attorney in Bucks County PA

The moral of this sad tale is if you are an owner of a condominium unit and if you believe that the condominium association is trying to collect assessments that you believe to be unwarranted, you should consult with a capable real estate attorney in Bucks County because the consequences of being wrong can be devastating.

PA Townships Must Review Land Development Plans in Good Faith

Posted on June 20, 2016 by bwadmin

Reply

COMMONWEALTH COURT HOLDS THAT A TOWNSHIP HAS A DUTY TO REVIEW LAND DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN GOOD FAITH

Does a municipality have an obligation to review development plans in good faith?

Recently, the Commonwealth Court answered that question with a resounding in Honey Brook Estates v. Honey Brook Township, 132 A3d 611 (Pa.Cmwlth.2016). The facts there showed that in 2005 the developer purchased a forty-acre parcel zoned to permit multi-family dwellings. Six months, Honey Brook Township began the process of rezoning the property to prohibit permit multi-family development for the property. Before Honey Brook Township adopted its ordinance that would have frustrated the developer’s plans, the developer filed a Preliminary Subdivision and Land Development Plan proposing 78 townhouse units for the property.

Predecessor Influence of Nonconforming Use

Posted on March 11, 2016 by bwadmin

Reply

One of the more perplexing issues that confront land use lawyers and their clients is the question whether their actions or that of their predecessor or that planned by their purchasers or tenants jeopardizes a protected nonconforming use.

Consider, for a moment, that an owner has used his or her property as a parking lot for many years before the township adopted its first zoning ordinance. The same consideration would apply if the owner secured a zoning permit for this use under permissive zoning regulations that later changed to eliminate parking lots as a permitted use. In either case, settled law would recognize the parking lot use as a constitutionally protected nonconforming use, a right that runs with the land. Thus, if the property owner decided to sell or to lease the land to another who wanted to operate a parking lot on the property, the new owner or tenant would have the unquestioned right to continue the activity irrespective of any later changes in zoning regulations.

The problem arises when the use stops for a period. A related problem arises when the proposed purchaser or new tenant wants to engage in a use that is only similar to the protected use but not identical and involves activities that embraced by the former use. Then what?

Pennsylvania Power of Attorney Law Has Changed as of January 1, 2015

Posted on February 26, 2015 by bwadmin

1

On July 2, 2014, the Governor signed Act 95 into law amending Title 20 of Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes (20 Pa. C.S. §5601-5612) regulating Powers of Attorneys (“POAs”). These recent revisions do not affect the validity or enforceability of a POA properly signed under prior law; they remain valid. However, a POA made after January 1, 2015, must comply with the amendments. Among the more significant changes are those that affect:

The execution of a POA;
The Agent’s duties; and
The liability of an Agent, the powers of an Agent, and third party liability

Case Study: Waller Corporation v. Warren Plaza, Inc.

Posted on September 17, 2014 by bwadmin

2

The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently held that a general contractor was entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under the Pennsylvania Contractor and Sub-Contractor Payment Act (“CSPA”) regardless of whether the property owner who hired the general contractor had a good faith basis to withhold payment.

In Waller Corporation v. Warren Plaza, Inc., Warren Plaza hired Waller Corporation to construct a 15 unit apartment building which was partly funded by a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development grant. The parties prepared 8 change orders throughout the project, two of which were unsigned by Warren and were not submitted to HUD for approval. The changes related to the floors of the building and relocation of the unit water heaters. Warren ultimately refused to pay for the changes and Waller brought suit alleging a breach of contract and violations of CSPA.

Benner and Wild Prevail For Rainbow Ridge Equestrian Center In Zoning Appeal Battle

Posted on December 24, 2013 by bwadmin

Reply

On December 9, 2013 The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court reversed decisions of the Bedminster Township Building Code of Appeals Board and the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas and found that Rainbow Ridge Equestrian Center’s proposed barn with an area for exercising horses required no building permit. The Court adopted Benner and Wild’s position that an agricultural building may be both agricultural and commercial and remain exempt from permit requirements.

Zoning Appeals, Land Use, Legal Services

Benner and Wild Prevail in Zoning Appeal

Edward M. Wild, Esquire, a partner at Benner and Wild Attorneys at Law who has represented developers, national and local businesses and property owners involved in zoning appeals and disputes, successfully argued to the Commonwealth Court that a barn building that has commercial attributes can maintain its status as an agricultural building so long as access to some members of the public is regulated through restrictions that included gates and locked key pads and the members of the public had contracts with Rainbow Ridge. Attorney Wild convinced the Court that the partially constructed barn would not be open to the public any more than a private residence is open to the public. Read more about Benner and Wild Prevail For Rainbow Ridge Equestrian Center In Zoning Appeal Battle →

Changes in DUI Cases

Posted on October 15, 2013 by bwadmin

1

Two recent decisions from the Pennsylvania Superior Court concerning driving under the influence (DUI) may affect how these cases are decided in the future and how they are handled by Bucks County law firms.

Read more about Changes in DUI Cases →

Benefits of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Bucks County

Posted on August 28, 2013 by bwadmin

Reply

Whether court-appointed or by the choice of one or both parties, mediation and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) can help those involved with contract problems resolve legal disputes in a way that can end up being fair to both sides. At a time when many contracts and legally binding documents require it as the first or only step for parties to solve any problems, it can be easy to forget that ADR provides many benefits as an alternative to litigation in Bucks County.

When It is Required as a First Step

Many contracts now require both parties to engage in mediation and/or arbitration before, or in many cases instead of, any other legal actions. When these documents require proceedings to take place in Pennsylvania, then Bucks County alternate dispute resolution practitioners can help would-be litigants come to a settlement or a compromise. The reasons for including an arbitration clause usually revolve around cost, although some companies also use it to limit the possibility of class action lawsuits which can be costly for defendants while providing relatively small settlements for any plaintiffs.

Real Estate Law in Bucks County: Seller Disclosure

Posted on April 2, 2013 by bwadmin

1

Real Estate Law Benner and Wild In a 5-4 decision in real estate law, the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently decided that a seller of residential real estate is not required to disclose the fact that there was a murder/suicide by the prior owners in the home.

In Milliken v. Jacono, Mr. and Mrs. Jacono purchased a property at sheriff’s sale that had been the site of a murder/suicide involving the prior owners. The Jaconos appeared to have bought the home as a quick investment and soon after purchasing it, relisted it for sale. They were aware of the murder/suicide and along with their agent and broker consulted with the Pennsylvania Association of Realtors to determine whether they had a duty to disclose it under the mandates of the Real Estate Seller Disclosure Law. They were both advised by the association that disclosure was not necessary.

New PA Legislation for Benefit Corporations

Posted on January 18, 2013 by bwadmin

Reply

Pennsylvania recently passed legislation creating a new type of corporate legal entity, called the benefit corporation. A for profit company registered under these provisions can have as their purpose some beneficially social, environmental or other cause rather than purely profit driven. Over 600 businesses worldwide have already joined this socially-driven business movement. Legislation recognizing the benefit corporation as an entity has already been passed in 10 other states and is moving forward in 16 additional states.

Benefit corporations are a new class of corporation which is required to create a materially positive impact on society. The core principles of the structure of any certified benefit corporation are purpose, accountability and transparency. Companies interested in becoming a benefit corporation choose to do so because it will help forward a social mission, expand shareholder rights and provide the option to enact one or more general public benefit purposes.