by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jan 13, 2016
The Circuit Court for Baltimore City has entered a significant money judgment against a condominium council of unit owners as a means of enforcing its prior order finding the condominium in contempt for failing to complete court ordered repairs. In a case in which I represented the unit owner, the Circuit Court had originally ordered the Harborview Condominium to undertake and complete, by the end of December 2013, certain specified repairs to the exterior common elements needed to make the building watertight. In July 2014, the Circuit Court held that both the failure to include certain specified items in the repair contract, and the failure to complete the repairs within the time ordered by the Court, amounted to willful contempt, and called for the imposition of sanctions. The Circuit Court further found that the case presented the “exceptional circumstances” required under Maryland law for the award of compensatory damages, consisting of monthly payments to the unit owner continuing until the repairs are completed. The Court also established certain construction deadlines to be met in order for the Condominium to avoid additional damage payments. These rulings were affirmed by the Maryland Court of Special Appeals in August 2015. In an order dated December 30, 2015, the Circuit Court directed that the unpaid monthly payments to the unit owner be entered as a money judgment. It further ordered that the total of monthly payments not yet due be accelerated and included in the money judgment. The total money judgment entered exceeds $600,000. (more…)
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Aug 24, 2015
The Maryland Court of Special Appeals has upheld a ruling of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City finding a Condominium Council of Unit Owners in contempt of court for failing to make common element repairs within the time designated in the ruling of an arbitrations panel, and ordering that monthly payments to the displaced unit owner for alternative living expenses continue until the repairs are properly completed. I served as counsel for the unit owner. The appeal can be found entitled as 100 Harborview Drive Condominium Council of Unit Owners v. Penthouse 4C, LLC, No. 0901, Sept. Term 2014, and you can review the opinion by copying the following link: http://www.courts.state.md.us/appellate/unreportedopinions/2015/0901s14.pdf
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Aug 12, 2015
Maryland Governor Larry Hogan has signed into law HB 1183, which provides protections to new home buyers who are unable to secure a loan commitment to permit them to proceed to closing. The new law, which relates only to the initial sale of new homes, amends Section 14-117 of the Real Property Article in the Annotated Code of Maryland concerning loan contingencies in new home contracts. It provides that all new home contracts must be contingent on the purchaser obtaining a loan commitment. Additionally, the contract must state the maximum loan interest rate the purchaser is obligated to accept, and the time period in which the purchase must obtain a loan commitment. If the purchaser does not obtain a loan commitment within the stated rate limit and time period, either the seller or the purchaser may declare the contract void. Any deposit is to be returned to the purchaser. (more…)
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jun 22, 2015
A bill that was originally intended to require homeowner associations to provide resale certificates, and to limit fees charged by condominium and homeowner associations for providing resale certificates, passed both houses of the Maryland General Assembly, but the two houses were unable to reconcile amendments, including one intended to limit the association’s liability for inaccurate information contained in those certificates. The Maryland Senate and the House of Delegates both passed versions of House Bill 1007. As originally proposed, HB 1007 would have limited the fee charged by condominium councils of unit owners for providing required information in connection with the resale of a unit. It also provided that required resale disclosure information to be furnished by a homeowners association as part of the sale of a home in the community. These requirements were retained in the amended versions passed by both houses. One amendment changed the amount of the fee that could be charged. Further amendments provided for two additional fees associated with the resale process. A significant amendment provided that “[a]ny liability of the council of unit owners for an error or omission in the certificate shall be limited to the amount of the fees paid for the certificate.” Although versions of the bill were passed on the floor of both houses, a final version to reconcile the amendments was not produced before the session ended.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | May 4, 2015
Here is a link to my opinion/commentary piece in The Baltimore Sun: Choices for Baltimore
