Howard W. Kingsley joined Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. in 1998. He is a partner in the firm's litigation department who has successfully handled and tried many complex issues in real estate, commercial, and landlord-tenant litigation in state, federal and bankruptcy courts. Mr. Kingsley has recently focused on commercial mortgage foreclosures. For example, Mr. Kingsley successfully obtained summary judgment for a special servicer of a CMBS and the right to foreclose on a $195 million mortgage covering almost 50 properties in Manhattan. He also represents purchasers of distressed mortgage loans in foreclosure as a strategy for obtaining large and valuable vacant development sites in New York City.
Mr. Kingsley has effectively used his commercial landlord-tenant expertise to aggressively protect landlords in bankruptcy court when other attorneys seem to let the debtor control the landlord. Mr. Kingsley has also litigated construction disputes, including defending claims against mechanics who have filed liens in the millions of dollars against commercial real property.
Some other representative cases demonstrating Mr. Kingsley's deft litigation skills include cases which were featured on the front page of The New York Law Journal, such as successfully obtaining for Carnegie Hall possession of more than 50 apartments in the tower above the famed concert hall, which enabled a gut rehabilitation of the tower to enhance the institution's commitment to its non-profit mission of making great music accessible to as many people as possible, and successfully obtaining summary judgment to void a stipulation as against public policy, which decision was affirmed by the New York State Court of Appeals. Other examples include successfully obtaining a directed verdict during a jury trial entitling the landlord to take possession of a 400-bed nursing home and a $20 million money judgment, and trying a non-primary residence case against a known rock musician, which was affirmed on appeal.
Mr. Kingsley has developed an expertise in landlord-tenant proceedings involving gasoline service stations.
Mr. Kingsley has authored articles appearing in legal journals and has also volunteered his time as an arbitrator.
Selected Cases and Representations
Carnegie Hall Corp. v. Niffenegger, 18 Misc.3d 490, 852 N.Y.S.2d 663. "Carnegie Hall May Evict Tenants from its Towers, Housing Court Decides," 12/5/07 NYLJ, p. 1, col. 3.
Successfully obtained summary judgment to void a stipulation as against public policy, which decision was affirmed by the New York State Court of Appeals. Riverside Syndicate, Inc. v. Munroe, 10 N.Y.3d 18, 853 N.Y.S.2d 263 (2008); "Stipulation is Found to Violate Public Policy," 4/9/07 NYLJ, p. 1, col. 3.
Successfully obtained for Special Servicer C-III summary judgment and the right to foreclose on a $195 million mortgage covering almost 50 properties in Manhattan, which mortgage was a CMBS.
After successfully removing a case from Supreme Court to Bankruptcy Court, obtained for the Paramount Group summary judgment and defeated a sub-tenant's motion for a preliminary injunction with respect to a valuable floor of office space. Alstra Capital Management LLC v. PGREF I 1633 Broadway Tower LP, 2009 WL 2905759 (Bkrtcy.S.D.N.Y.).
Successfully reversed order striking pleading and vacating $9 million judgment, W&W Glass, LLC v. 1113 York Ave. Realty Co., Inc., 83 A.D.3d 438, 920 N.Y.S.2d 347 (1st Dep't 2011).
For Durst-Fetner Residential, successfully defeated the attempt of the last commercial tenant of large vacant development to avoid eviction by filing for bankruptcy protection in less than one month after the filing.
Successfully tried non-primary residence case against rock musician Johnny Winter. 501 East 87th St. Realty Co., LLC v. Ole Pa Enterprises Inc., 191 Misc.2d 796, 745 N.Y.S.2d 827 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co. 2002), aff'd 304 A.D.2d 310, 757 N.Y.S.2d 31 (1st Dep't 2003).
Michael Rivera v. Heidi Tannenbaum: Represented a shareholder of a Private Housing Finance Law Article 11 cooperative corporation. Under the applicable statutes, and the Article 11 cooperative’s Articles of Incorporation, all of the apartments are exempt from rent stabilization. Nor was there any agreement with the City that imposed any rent regulation on any apartment. The shareholder brought a holdover action against a former spouse who refused to vacate the apartment. Tenant alleged that the apartment was rent regulated because the cooperative pays real estate taxes at a reduced rate based on its Article 11 status. The Housing Court judge correctly applied all of the applicable law in dismissing the tenant’s defenses and awarding the shareholder a judgment of possession, use and occupancy at the market rate and attorneys’ on the shareholder’s motion for summary judgment. This case is important because it demonstrates that if property owners carefully explain the governing statutes, the court is likely to reach the correct decision about an apartment’s exempt status, and that the Roberts decision does not mean that a tenant will automatically win if it alleges the apartment is regulated. (R&E Team: Howard W. Kingsley, Nicholas Kamilatos and Joshua Kopelowitz.)
Getty Properties Corp. v. Getty Petroleum Marketing Inc.: R&E represents the landlord Getty Properties Corp., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Getty Realty Corp., a publicly-owned real estate investment trust, which sought to obtain the monthly rent of almost $5 million under a lease that covers approximately 800 properties in 12 states. The tenant sought to avoid paying the rent and sought Yellowstone injunctions in the Supreme Court to prevent the landlord from terminating the lease for the non-payment of rent. R&E successfully argued that any Yellowstone injunction should be conditioned upon the tenant paying the full amount due. Supreme Court and the Appellate Division agreed. This decision was in December, 2011. After the tenant failed to meet the conditions, the landlord terminated the lease and successfully obtained a temporary restraining order requiring the tenant to place all rents it received from its subtenants at all of the 800 properties into escrow. Immediately thereafter, the tenant filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. R&E represented the landlord in the Bankruptcy Court. R&E is assisting the client to obtain possession of the properties.
