<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>A. Christopher Florio - New Jersey Law Blog</title>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/a-christopher-florio.html</link>
<description>A. Christopher Florio, Shareholder, practices in the Community Associations Law Group. In addition, Mr. Florio has substantial experience in the negotiation of loan transactions, work-outs, real estate law, including foreclosures, and also has substantial expertise in floor-plan financing.Mr. Florio has served as a member of the New Jersey Assembly Task Force, commissioned to study community associations in New Jersey. He was appointed to the position by General Assembly Speaker Chuck Haytaian and again by General Assembly Speaker Jack Collins. Additionally, he serves on the New Jersey Chapter of the Community Associations Institute (CAI) Board of Directors and is President of CA-PAC, the New Jersey Chapter of the Community Associations Institute Political Action Committee. Mr. Florio is a frequent speaker in the area of community association law.Mr. Florio is also serving a two year term on the Monmouth Republican Committee as a committeeman for the Upper Freehold (NJ) District. He also serves on the Recreation Committee in Upper Freehold Township.</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 08:01:53 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 10:15:59 -0500</pubDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

<item>
<title>Capital Contributions Now Permitted by NJ Condominium Act</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>On September 10, 2007, Governor Corzine signed into legislation a bill modifying Section 46:8B-15 of the New Jersey Condominium Act.&nbsp; The bill now confirms that condominium associations may charge a capital contribution or membership fee, as long as the association&rsquo;s master deed or by-laws provide the authority for doing so.&nbsp; You may recall that the recent <u>Micheve </u>case cast doubt on an association&rsquo;s ability to collect these fees.&nbsp; Also included in the bill is a provision mandating that association funds must be maintained separately and not commingled. </p>
<p><u>Capital Contribution and Membership Fees.&nbsp;</u> The law now provides that, if authorized by the master deed or bylaws, an association may collect a capital contribution, membership fee or other charge upon the initial sale or subsequent resale of a unit.&nbsp; The funds collected must be allocated for maintaining or improving the common elements or defraying common expenses or otherwise.&nbsp; The charge may not exceed nine times the amount of the most recent monthly common expense assessment for the unit.&nbsp; The bill also validates any existing master deed or bylaws provision which already provides for the collection of this type of fee.&nbsp; </p>
<p>Thus, a condominium association whose by-laws or master deed already include authority to charge a capital contribution or membership fee (whether in the original version or by amendment prior to this legislation) can now be confident of its ability to charge the fee.&nbsp; Any condominium association which does not currently have the authority to charge a capital contribution or membership fee may now take steps to amend its by-laws or master deed. </p>
<p>The legislation, because it is part of the Condominium Act, does not apply to homeowners associations or cooperatives.&nbsp; </p>
<p><u>Maintaining Association Funds.&nbsp;</u> The law also includes a provision that requires all funds collected by the association to be maintained separately in the association&rsquo;s name.&nbsp; For investment purposes only, reserves may be commingled with operating funds of the association as long as each fund is accounted for separately and the balance of the account never falls below the amount identified as reserve funds.&nbsp; Under no circumstances may association funds be commingled with the funds of the managing agent, a trustee, or of another association.&nbsp; These requirements should not be a surprise to most associations as they likely operate in this way already.&nbsp; </p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2007/10/articles/community-associations/capital-contributions-now-permitted-by-nj-condominium-act/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2007/10/articles/community-associations/capital-contributions-now-permitted-by-nj-condominium-act/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 08:01:53 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>New Jersey Superior Court Rules on Surplus Funds Affecting Homeowner&apos;s Associations</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>On December 22, 2006, the Honorable Neil H. Shuster, Chancery Division, Mercer County Superior Court, rendered a decision in the case of <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/Brandon Farms.pdf"><em>Washington Mutual Home Loans, Inc. v. Rodrigo S. Lima, et al.</em></a> This decision marks the first time that a New Jersey court has addressed the issue of distributing surplus funds resulting from a foreclosure sale on an &ldquo;affordable housing unit&rdquo; where a township or municipality was the successful bidder.</p>
<p>In this case Hopewell Township claimed entitlement to all surplus funds above the mortgaged amount arguing that under current New Jersey Law the owner of the affordable unit would be &ldquo;personally obligated to pay the administrative entity responsible for assuring affordability any surplus funds,&rdquo; should the property be foreclosed upon. However, the Brandon Farms Condominium Association argued that the New Jersey Condominium Act, which provides homeowner associations the right to collect on any liens, takes priority over the statute cited by Hopewell Township. Brandon Farms also argued that it would be impractical to expect an association to provide a myriad of services to its members if it has no means of collecting assessments to fund the costs of services.</p>
<p>Despite the Township&rsquo;s claim to the entire surplus, Judge Shuster found that Brandon Farms was entitled to have their liens satisfied using surplus funds, and that only after the Association collected on their liens would any remaining monies go to the Township.<br /></p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2007/01/articles/community-associations/new-jersey-superior-court-rules-on-surplus-funds-affecting-homeowners-associations/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2007/01/articles/community-associations/new-jersey-superior-court-rules-on-surplus-funds-affecting-homeowners-associations/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 15:02:06 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 56</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This week's <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/">New Jersey Legal Update</a> podcast will discuss the landmark case of <em><strong>Washington Mutual Home Loans, Inc. v. Rodrigo S. Lima, et al.</strong></em> This podcast will give a brief summary of the case, as well as a discussion of the implications of this decision and the impact it will have on Condominium Associations.</p>
<p>This week's New Jersey Legal Update is presented by <a href="http://www.stark-stark.com/attorney-lawyer-1010588.html">A. Christopher Florio</a>, Co-Chair of Stark &amp; Stark&rsquo;s <a href="http://www.stark-stark.com/attorney-lawyer-1011049.html">Community Associations</a> Group.</p>
<p>You can download the New Jersey Legal Update Podcast # 56 <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/NJ_Legal_Update-56(07.1.12).mp3">here</a>. (5.6 MB)<br /><p><strong><strong> Technorati Tags:</strong> </strong><a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/New Jersey" rel="tag">New Jersey</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/podcast" rel="tag">Podcast</a> :&nbsp; <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/Community Associations" rel="tag">Community Associations</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/Brandon Farms" rel="tag">Brandon Farms</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/Condo" rel="tag">Condo</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/Surplus Funds" rel="tag">Surplus Funds</a> </p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2007/01/articles/community-associations/new-jersey-legal-update-podcast-56/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2007/01/articles/community-associations/new-jersey-legal-update-podcast-56/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:57:13 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>
<enclosure url="http://www.njlawblog.com/NJ_Legal_Update-56(07.1.12).mp3" length="5891532" type="audio/mpeg" />
</item>
<item>
<title>New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 36</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This week's <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/cat-podcasts.html">New Jersey Legal Update</a> podcast will discuss the recent Appellate Court decision in <em><strong><a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/community-associations-condominiums-may-be-liable-for-failure-to-warn-owners-of-dangerous-conditions.html">Siddons v. Cook</a></strong></em> which stated that condominiums may have a duty to warn condominium owners of potentially dangerous conditions known to it, even involving property or issues related only to an individual unit.</p>
<p>This week's New Jersey Legal Update is presented by <a href="http://www.stark-stark.com/attorney-lawyer-1010588.html">Christopher Florio</a>, Co-Chair of the Firm's <a href="http://www.stark-stark.com/attorney-lawyer-1011049.html">Community Associations</a> Group.</p>
<p>You can download the New Jersey Legal Update Podcast # 36 <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/NJ_Legal_Update-36(06.06.16).mp3">here</a>.(4.5 MB)  </p>
<p><strong>Technorati Tags:</strong> <a rel="tag" href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/New Jersey">New Jersey</a> : <a rel="tag" href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/podcast">Podcast</a> : <a rel="tag" href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/community association">Community Association</a> : <a rel="tag" href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/condo">Condo</a></p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2006/06/articles/community-associations/new-jersey-legal-update-podcast-36/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2006/06/articles/community-associations/new-jersey-legal-update-podcast-36/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jun 2006 08:12:03 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>
<enclosure url="http://www.njlawblog.com/NJ_Legal_Update-36(06.06.16).mp3" length="4649469" type="audio/mpeg" />
</item>
<item>
<title>New Jersey Legal Update - Podcast # 33</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This week's <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/cat-podcasts.html">New Jersey Legal Update</a> is presented by Christopher Florio, Co-Chair of the Firm's Community Associations Group.  This week's update discusses the New Jersey Appellate Division's ruling in  <em><a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/community-associations-353-condominium-capital-contributions-in-jeopardy.html"><b>Micheve v. Wyndham Place at Freehold Condominium Association</a></em></b>.  In Micheve, the Court struck down the practice of associations raising monies through capital contributions paid by the seller at closing.</p>

<p>You can download the New Jersey Legal Update Podcast # 33 <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/NJ_Legal_Update-33(06.04.13).mp3">here</a>.(8MB)</p>

<p><strong>Technorati Tags:</strong> <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/New Jersey" rel="tag">New Jersey</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/podcast" rel="tag">Podcast</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/condo" rel="tag">Condo</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/Community Association" rel="tag">Community Association</a></p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2006/04/articles/community-associations/new-jersey-legal-update-podcast-33/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2006/04/articles/community-associations/new-jersey-legal-update-podcast-33/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:07:59 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>
<enclosure url="http://www.njlawblog.com/NJ_Legal_Update-33(06.04.13).mp3" length="8466416" type="audio/mpeg" />
</item>
<item>
<title>Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act (UCIOA)</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>As a longstanding member of the New Jersey Chapter of <a href="http://www.cainj.org">Community Associations Institute</a> (CAI) legislative action committee, the 2006 President of CAI's political action committee (CA-PAC), and as Secretary of CAI's Board of Directors, my involvement in the New Jersey legislative process on matters affecting community associations in New Jersey has dramatically increased.<br />
 <br />
In that regard, I was present at the February 23, 2006 Housing Committee where <a href="http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/members/carabal.asp">Assemblyman Caraballo</a>'s bill, known as the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act (UCIOA) was voted out of committee, and sent to the Assembly floor for a full vote. The bill, known as <a href="http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2006/Bills/A1000/798_I1.HTM">A-798</a>, is a sweeping bill that for the first time in New Jersey history would bring under the auspices of one law issues affecting all community associations in the State (condominiums, homeowners, and cooperatives).  Assemblyman Caraballo, a law professor at Seton Hall Law School, has made it very clear that his bill is the first of its kind in the State that will help protect the rights of homeowners living within a community association, while also helping community associations operate more efficiently.<br />
 <br />
On March 2, 2006, the bill was passed by the New Jersey Assembly by a vote of 55-14, with 6 abstentions.  The bill will now go to the Senate for its consideration and disposition.</p>

<p><strong>Technorati Tags:</strong> <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/New Jersey" rel="tag">New Jersey</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/community associations" rel="tag">Community Associations</a></p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2006/03/articles/community-associations/uniform-common-interest-ownership-act-ucioa/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2006/03/articles/community-associations/uniform-common-interest-ownership-act-ucioa/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:44:03 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>Senior Housing Developments and Their Impact on Local Schools</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The general position taken for years has been that senior developments are good for towns because they provide ratables, yet they have little or no impact on the local school system. However, recent newspaper articles report that a number of senior developments have children of school age, thus debunking the generally accepted theory.</p>

<p>The Fair Housing Act, and its amendments, are vehicles used by senior housing developments so that they may "legally discriminate" based upon age.  This is acceptable so long as the association maintains its established rules and procedures set forth in the Fair Housing Act. While this post is not intended to go through that procedure, it is intended to advise community associations that they may enforce age restrictions set forth in their own governing documents.</p>

<p>Recently, a town in New Jersey concluded that its ordinance pertaining to senior housing (or age restricted communities) mandated that anyone under the age of 19 may not live in any age restricted community within its township boundaries, with limited exception.  The association's governing documents set minimum age requirements which were enforceable.  In this situation I believe the Township's ordinance was to narrow and the Township should have been required to broaden its acceptance of age limitations for restricted communities.  </p>

<p><br />
<strong>Technorati Tags:</strong> <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/New Jersey" rel="tag">New Jersey</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/Condo" rel="tag">Condo</a> : <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/Community Association" rel="tag">Community Association</a></p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/12/articles/community-associations/senior-housing-developments-and-their-impact-on-local-schools/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/12/articles/community-associations/senior-housing-developments-and-their-impact-on-local-schools/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2005 09:06:44 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>Condominium Capital Contributions in Jeopardy</title>
<description><![CDATA[<center><strong><em>Micheve v. Wyndham Place at Freehold Condominium Association</em></strong></center>

<p>The Appellate Court recently struck down an associations ability to raise monies through a capital contribution paid at closing by the seller(Micheve v. Wyndham Place at Freehold Condominium Association).</p>

<p>This particular Board adopted its capital contribution by way of a Board resolution.  In ruling that the capital contribution was discriminatory, the Court stated that the resolution violated the New Jersey Condominium Statute, and the association's own Master deed and By-Laws.</p>

<p>Associations are urged to discuss this issue with its counsel, particularly if the association charges a capital contribution by an adopted resolution.</p>

<p><strong>Technorati Tags:</strong> <a href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/New Jersey" rel="tag">New Jersey</a></p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/12/articles/community-associations/condominium-capital-contributions-in-jeopardy/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/12/articles/community-associations/condominium-capital-contributions-in-jeopardy/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 09:15:22 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>Associations Should Retain Proof of Amendments to Bylaws</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.stark-stark.com/attorney-lawyer-1009823.html">Dave's</a> earlier <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/community-associations-288-associations-amended-bylaws-prevents-liability-in-injury-suit.html">post</a> on an Appellate Court's recent ruling regarding the amendment of association bylaws reminds me of a matter that our firm handled a few years ago. At the time, two of our attorneys were representing a client in a personal injury suit against an age-restricted community. The community had based its defense on the tort immunity statute. </p>

<p>Once I knew what the community's attorneys were basing their defense on, I suggested we file a motion requiring the community to prove it had gone through the required statutory steps to have the tort immunity amendment adopted. This meant proving to the Court that it held a validly announced meeting, and had in its possession all of the ballots that had been cast in that vote. When the community was unable to produce this documentation, the Judge found in favor of our client. </p>

<p>Community associations need to be aware that it is just as important when adopting the tort immunity amendment that the ballots and all of the other documentation of the vote are maintained and accessible in the event proof of their existence and or validity in needed in the future.  In addition to tort immunity amendments, associations must expand their review in determining what documents it will keep and for what period of time, in the event it is ever needed.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/05/articles/community-associations/associations-should-retain-proof-of-amendments-to-bylaws/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/05/articles/community-associations/associations-should-retain-proof-of-amendments-to-bylaws/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 19 May 2005 13:00:02 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>Transition, Fair Housing Act and Tort Immunity Seminars for Community Associations</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>I along with <a href="http://www.stark-stark.com/attorney-lawyer-1009524.html">Mary Barrett</a> have just finished conducting a series of educational seminars for South Jersey Chapter of New Jersey CAI, and another for property managers from a large nationally known property management company.<br />
 <br />
When we met with the South Jersey CAI, we discussed the topic of "transition" and what its meaning is for members of a Board.  The discussion ranged from the control to the homeowners of an Association, to negotiations with the Developer over construction deficiencies found during the investigative phase of the transition with the Developer.  Transition in a community association happens in two ways.  First, when the homeowners take control from the Developer and this control is "transitioned" from Developer.  The second transition occurs when the Board negotiates with the Developer over defects in the site found by the Association's engineer.<br />
 <br />
The second property managers seminar included a discussion about the impact of the Fair Housing Act on community associations, as well as <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/community-associations-288-associations-amended-bylaws-prevents-liability-in-injury-suit.html">tort immunity</a>.<br />
 <br />
Fair Housing Act issues deal with various individuals typically living in an Association who need a "reasonable accommodation" in order to maintaining a reasonable lifestyle within the community.  Examples range from the person who needs a designated handicap parking space due to a specific handicap, to the individual who needs to have a ramp built to their particular home to accommodate a wheel chair.<br />
 <br />
Tort immunity is a New Jersey statute that enables a community association to insulate itself from certain bodily injuries(typically those considered caused by "simple negligence") if they go through a certain procedure top have their membership adopt an amendment to their by-laws. </p>

<p>Here is a <a href="http://www.njlawblog.com/ACF - CAI Agenda05.pdf">link</a> to the agenda for our presentation on transition.  If your board or management company would like to discuss transition issues, tort immunity, Fair Housing Act requirements or other matters  which impact associations, please feel free to <a href="mailto:cflorio@stark-stark.com">contact me</a> to discuss scheduling an educational seminar.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/05/articles/community-associations/transition-fair-housing-act-and-tort-immunity-seminars-for-community-associations/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/05/articles/community-associations/transition-fair-housing-act-and-tort-immunity-seminars-for-community-associations/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2005 10:45:27 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>Community Association - Corporate Filings</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Most community associations, condominium associations, and cooperatives in New Jersey were organized as non-profit corporations.  Corporations, even non-profit corporations, have certain annual filing requirements which must be made with the State of New Jersey.  We are seeing an increased number of associations which have not maintained their corporate filings and have even reinstated a few which had to change their corporate names.  </p>

<p>The requirements are not complex but must be addressed regularly and accurately.  A corporation must submit an annual report with the required fee each year following its date of incorporation.  This is also an opportunity to ensure that its registered agent and the physical location of the registered office is correct.  A corporation which fails to file its annual report for two consecutive years may have its charter revoked.  As a result of this revocation, the corporation can lose the right to use its corporate name, among other things.  To reinstate its good standing, the corporation must submit certain forms and fees.  If, while its charter was revoked its name has been "taken" by another corporation, the association will have to come up with a new name requiring new filings and additional fees.  A Stark & Stark attorney can serve as the association's registered agent which facilitates the necessary filings each year.  </p>

<p>Please take a moment to ensure that your association's corporate filings are up to date.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/02/articles/community-associations/community-association-corporate-filings/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/02/articles/community-associations/community-association-corporate-filings/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:10:51 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>Community Association Property Tax Alert</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>It is critical that homeowners associations are vigilant of the way in which their municipality assesses taxes on the community's common area. Now that the 2005 property tax assessments are being mailed out, many people may have questions about how community associations should be taxed.  An area that community associations should pay particular attention to, is how their common property areas are taxed.</p>

<p>Common areas include clubhouses, pools, and recreation areas such as playgrounds and tennis courts.   In New Jersey, towns and municipalities may not tax a condominium's common elements. It is generally believed, but not technically the case, that the common areas of a homeowners association enjoy the same tax protection. </p>

<p>Many associations are improperly assessed taxes on their common areas. Now is the time to review tax assessments and determine whether a tax appeal is warranted.  We suggest the following:</p>

<p>1.Get a copy of your 2005 tax assessment.  Your tax assessor will send you a small "green card" in January or early February stating the association's tax assessment.  If you do not receive the tax card, call the township tax assessor.</p>

<p>2.Review the tax card and determine if common property is being separately assessed.  Is the clubhouse being assessed at its full value?  Is open space being assessed as a building lot?</p>

<p>3.Review the association's governing documents to confirm that the common property is specifically identified as common property, subject to restrictions on use and transfers.</p>

<p>4.If the common property is being separately taxed, call us to discuss filing a tax appeal.  We may be able to help reduce the assessment to a nominal value or no value at all. </p>

<p>5. <u><strong>IMPORTANT: The deadline to file your tax appeal is April 1, 2005.</strong></u></p>

<p>Should your homeowner association have questions regarding the assessment of its common property area, contact <a href="http://66.113.175.243/attorney-lawyer-1010588.html">A. Christopher Florio</a>, <a href="http://66.113.175.243/attorney-lawyer-1009823.html">David J. Byrne</a> or <a href="http://66.113.175.243/attorney-lawyer-1010298.html">Timothy P. Duggan</a> to discuss your specific matter.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/02/articles/community-associations/community-association-property-tax-alert/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2005/02/articles/community-associations/community-association-property-tax-alert/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category><category>Residential Real Estate</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2005 14:35:22 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>
<item>
<title>Assessments</title>
<description><![CDATA[<center><em><strong>Brandon Farms Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Brandon Farms Condominium Association, Inc.</strong></em></center>

<p>The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that under the Condominium Act, N.J.S.A. 46:8B-1 a builder or developer cannot make a condominium association responsible for an individual association member's failure to pay assessments owed to an "umbrella" organization.  In this matter, the "umbrella" organization was the plaintiff, Brandon Farms Property Owners Association which was made up of three separate classes of property owners in the Brandon Farms complex.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.njlawblog.com/2004/09/articles/community-associations/assessments/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.njlawblog.com/2004/09/articles/community-associations/assessments/</guid>
<category>Community Associations</category><category>Residential Real Estate</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2004 18:33:19 -0500</pubDate>
<author>cflorio@stark-stark.com (A. Christopher Florio)</author>

</item>

</channel>
</rss>