On July 31, 2017, Attorney Ken Krems in the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly front page article, “Tax foreclosure doesn’t change tenant-at-will status.”
News & Alerts
Recent News & Alerts
On April 24, 2017, Attorney Ken Krems was featured on the front page of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, in its article “Landlord-tenant bar busy tackling ‘legal pot’ issue.” Attorney Krems, a leader in the field of real estate law who represents more than 20 companies managing approximately 15,000 apartments in Massachusetts, was interviewed by the news publication regarding the legal implications facing property managers following Massachusetts’ legalization of marijuana.
Congratulations to Attorney Scott Carman who was recently elected Chairman of the City of Medford's Zoning Board of Appeals. Scott is in the first year of his three year term since joining the Board of Appeals in April 2016.
Now that the ballot question on recreational marijuana has been approved, the question for landlords is what can they do about this and what rights do they have.
Shaevel & Krems, LLP is pleased to announce that Attorney Ken Krems has been selected as a 2016 New England "Super Lawyer" in the field of Real Estate.
Each year, Super Lawyers magazine names attorneys across the country from more than 70 practice areas who have a high level of peer recognition and professional achievement. The selection process includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations.
If you would like more information about Super Lawyers, please visit the Super Lawyers website.
In their Summer 2016 issue, Baystate Apartment Owner published Attorney Krems' article "Domestic Violence: Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords & Victims."
In their June 2016 issue, the Real Estate Bar Association newsletter published Attorney Krems' article "Criminal history screening procedures focus of newly issued HUD guidance."
Congratulations to Attorney Scott Carman who was recently appointed to serve as a member of the City of Medford's Board of Appeals. Scott joins Partner David Jackowitz (Zoning Board of Appeals of Natick) in becoming the second attorney in the firm to serve in this capacity for their local governments.
Article by Ken Krems in Bay State Apartment Owner Publication, 3rd Quarter, 2015
Supreme Court rules that disparate impact claims can be brought under the Fair Housing Act.
Article by Christina P. O'Neill in Bay State Apartment Owner publication
Updates from the Shaevel & Krems Real Estate Management team
On August 8, 2014, Governor Patrick signed what has been called a “sweeping new law” for construction project owners, contractors and subcontractors. Most importantly, the law sets a limit on the amount of “retainage” a project owner can withhold from contractors and subcontractors.
Real Estate Development Team Advisory
"Spot zoning" occurs when a particular lot of land is singled out for a different treatment under a city's zoning restrictions than that accorded to the larger zoned area. A parcel is invalidly "rezoned" for a different land use than is otherwise permitted when it is done for the sole purpose of financially benefiting the owner, and not for any legitimate public purpose.
Earlier this month, the Land Court considered whether impermissible spot zoning occurred when the Town of Swampscott attempted to rezone a parcel, owned by the town itself, to accommodate a multistory, 41-unit apartment complex in an area otherwise designated for single-family residences only. The town expected to sell the parcel to a private developer.
Labor and Employment Update
A non-compete agreement typically seeks to restrict an employee’s ability to leave one company and join a competitor for a specified amount of time after leaving. They are common in the tech industry, and large tech firms typically oppose any legislative attempts to limit their use. Others suggest that these agreements unduly restrict the workforce and restrain startup companies.
Last week, the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development hosted dozens to testify for and against limitations on non-compete agreements. Among those testifying was Governor Deval Patrick’s Secretary of Housing and Economic Development, Gregory Bialecki. Governor Patrick has consistently indicated his support for increased regulation of these agreements, and Secretary Bialecki stated that the administration seeks outright elimination of the enforceability of non-compete agreements in Massachusetts.
Article by Kenneth Krems for the Bay State Apartment Owner publication
In 2008, there were very few smoke-free portions of apartment buildings in Massachusetts, though there was a growing interest. I wrote in the first quarter 2008 Bay State Apartment Owner, that it might be the wave of the future. Much has happened with smoke-free housing over the last few years, and it seems that this will, indeed, be the wave of the future.
Since early 2008, a number of new, luxury, completely smoke-free buildings have opened, such as 75 SL in Medford and Archstone Avenir in Boston. These are buildings where the resident is not only prohibited form smoking in the common areas, but the residents and residents' visitors are also prohibited from smoking in the apartments.
The Boston Housing Authority announced this year that within the next few years it hopes to make all of its developments smoke-free. Its first smoke-free development, Washington-Beech, is now open. The Boston Public Health Commission is embarking on an ambitious program to encourage landlords to make their buildings smoke-free. We will be hearing more about this in the coming months.
Article by Kenneth Krems for Bay State Apartment Owner publication
Over the last few years, much has been written about secondhand smoke. A report by the surgeon general of the United States in 2006 declared that "even small amounts of secondhand smoke exposure can be harmful to people's health." Since that report was published, there have been an increasing number of newspaper and magazine articles written about the potentially harmful effects of secondhand smoke.
There are currently many smoke-free office buildings, public buildings, hotels, restaurants, and bars. As the public becomes more knowledgeable about the effects of secondhand smoke, there should be an increased demand for completely smoke-free housing: housing where smoking is banned inside the apartments as well as in the common areas.
Real Estate Development Team Advisory
Some of you may be familiar with the concept of "adverse possession" in Massachusetts and the similar concept of easements by prescription. In order to establish an easement by prescription in Massachusetts, a plaintiff must present evidence that the use of the property has been (1) open and notorious, (2) adverse, (3) continuous and uninterrupted and (4) for the period of at least twenty (20) years. Ryan v. Stavros, 348 Mass. 251, 261 (1964); Tucker v. Poch, 321 Mass. 323 (1947); Brown v. Sneider, 9 Mass. App.Ct. 329 (1980). In the usual case, a plaintiff will argue that he or she has established the right to use a portion of the property of another by making use of a strip of land for driving, bicycle riding or walking across property owner by another person.
In one of our recent cases, the facts were slightly more unique. Our client owns vacant land north of Boston. An adjoining landowner and his family ("the claimant") sought and obtained permission from our client to use our client's land for certain purposes, including the taking of hay from our client's property and then selling that hay for profit. In exchange, the claimant maintained our client's property and helped out with odds and ends from time to time. This relationship began in the 1950s and continued into the 21st Century.
Real Estate Development Team Advisory
In Massachusetts, where many cities and towns are densely populated, one of the most common complaints of abutters to new development is concern about potential loss of view. The reality is that almost every proposed development has a negative impact on some abutter's view; but under Massachusetts law, before a lawsuit will be considered by the courts, abutters must prove that they have "standing." That is, abutters must show specific facts that establish a violation of a legal right and an injury special and different from that of the general public. In order to establish standing in a lawsuit related to the diminishment of a view, abutters must either show that views are protected in the zoning bylaw or they must set forth some other violation of a legal interest, such as the decrease in the value of the abutter's property.
Two recent Massachusetts court cases have dealt with this difficult issue of the loss of view and the right to sue.