Connecticut Real Estate Legal Questions

It is likely that you have obtained an easement in this use.  We would need additional information to really understand the nuances of the case, but it does seem likely from this brief description that you could prevail. The one challenge a case like this generates that you should know upfront is that the cost of this type of case can be daunting.  It is wise to have that conversation at the outset of the case to determine the cost benefit analysis.... Read Answer

Ordinarily, to answer a question such as yours, I would ask to see a copy of the lease. The lease may determine how best to proceed. If the tenant or guarantor has assets subject to being attached, then an attorney can either request a hearing seeking an attachment or issue a writ of attachment (if there is a commercial prejudgment remedy waiver section in proper form in the lease). Before undertaking to seek an attachment, we suggest evaluating whether any real estate owned by the tenant or guarantor has equity in the property. This would involve having a title search done on the subject property or properties. The same would apply as to assets such as equipment. For example, if the equipment assets are subject to a UCC lien in favor of a bank or other lender, and the value of the equipment is less than the lien, it may not be worth seeking an attachment. Regardless of the above, you can still proceed to seek an attachment on the assets of the tenant and/or guarantor, which may result in you getting paid quicker if there is indeed a transaction pending to sell the assets of the tenant. The above does not constitute legal advice and is only given as a response to your questions in general terms. You should not rely upon the statements above and you should consult with an attorney before proceeding with any action against your tenant. ... Read Answer

This should have been handled by your closing attorney.  There should have a calculated per diem amount to account for certain utilities on your Closing Disclosure.  Contact your real estate attorney.  Or feel free to contact us if you are unable to get assistance from your own attorney.  Good luck.... Read Answer

It depends on where the issue actually was, whether the previous owner had knowledge of it, whether they should have had knowledge of it, and what disclosures were actually made. I would need more details to make an accurate assessment, but depending on the circumstances that apply, I litigated a very similar case some years ago.  Please feel free to contact me for further information. 203. 870. 6700.... Read Answer

It depends on how  you hold title. Does she have rights in survivorship? That is, a survivorship deed means that the death of one party causes the property to devolve to the living owner. Otherwise, you may own the property as tenants in common.  When two or more people own community property like a home, either as joint tenants or tenants in common, each individual owns a share (or interest) of the entire property.  However, if you are simply worried about her name, its a very easy issue cleared up with an identity affidavit (worst case scenario) More than likely, even that is unnecessary. I'm sure your wife has ample means of proving identity.... Read Answer

The contract is not binding on a party until that party has signed.  You do not have to agree to the new date, but neither does the seller have to agree to the date you had proposed.  If you don't accept the new date, you have no agreement.  You should know that in most circumstances, the closing date in the contract is not binding and closing is adjourned at least once, unless that date is explicitly made "time of the essence." (in New York, it oculd be different in Connecticut, but I doubt it).... Read Answer

Don't get your hopes up.  If your mortgage lender is filing for Chapter 11 protection, it will either recover its financial standing, or its assets will be sold to another investor.  Either way, there will probably be no incentive for the lender to compromise its right to receive full payment from you.  If, however, you should receive any requests from the lender to renegotiate the loan -- as part of some kind of re-structuring of its assets -- you should pay close attention.  In such event, I recommend that you confer with a good real estate attorney in your area to take advantage of any possibilities.   ... Read Answer

Your son exercised poor judgement in making a substantial purchase with someone without having a stable commitment to and from that person.  He exercised poor judgement again when he conveyed his interest in the property apparently without getting legal advice.  As a result, he has a rather serious problem. By signing the Note and Mortgage upon purchase of the property, he committed to the lender that he would pay the Note amount according to a specified payment plan.  The lender is not concerned with whether he has continued to own an interest in the property or whether he might have conveyed his interest to the other co-owner.  The lender will expect to be paid and, if payment is not receive, the lender will almost certainly foreclose on the loan and, if any deficiency results from a resale of the property -- that is, if the lender does not receive full payment in the foreclosure process -- it will likely sue either or both of them for the deficiency.  You son should hope that the property can be sold on the open market and that the mortgage will be paid in full.  That is the only way he will be relieved from the debt.   ... Read Answer

Your mother's problem is both legal and personal.  Doing business with a relative is risky because, if things don't go well, family relations can be fractured or destroyed.  It is often hard to stand your ground on legal issues when doing so drives wedges between yourself and a relative.  But here is how I see it: Your Mom owns the duplex and she made a verbal agreement with her sister for the two of them to finance the purchase, live on the premises, and later (upon sale) they would split the net proceeds.  It is almost certain that under your state's law, a verbal contract like this would be unenforceable.  But if the sister had stayed put and kept her end of the bargain, I believe your Mom would also -- and everyone would be happy. I will assume that your Mom has paid half the mortgage payments for the past 13 years and so has her sister.  But now, the sister wants to pull out of the deal and get her money back.  If she gets her money  back, she will have lived there rent free for 13 years.  That isn't fair to your Mom who, in such a case, would be essentially required to pay "rent" on both units for those 13 years.    By moving out, she will be leaving your Mom to finish paying the house off by herself - again, not something your Mom bargained for.  It will be necessary for your Mom to rent the other unit to someone else so as to earn sufficient income to make the mortgage payments.  By moving out, the sister will be voluntarily surrendering her prospects of receiving some kind of pay-back in the future by a sale of the property  -- and she will remain liable on the note she signed with your Mom.  If your Mom can't make the payments and the house is foreclosed on, both of them would remain liable to the bank on any deficiency after the foreclosure.       From a purely legal standpoint, your Mom should hang tough but, by doing so, she may damage the relationship with her sister.  She may feel a lot of pressure to bend some.  ... Read Answer