DOCSLIB.ORG

Declarations-Part 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Declarations-Part 1 , ";IV..JULU ;......... '''' -..... iJ 111 ~ ~, CONOOPlIl'IIU!1 DECLARATION GOLDeN RI DGE. CONOOH IN! UHS WDeX Title Section No. Page No. Submis.;on to Condominium CMnersh!p, .............. 1 ........... C1!!finitions •••••• ~~.~ •• ~. ~" •• _ ~ ~ •• ,,~ ••• ~~ ••• ~. ~.# .2. ~ ..... 6.,."" Divi.ion of Property in the Condominium Units and Conveyance of Unit6 ••••.•••...••....• 3 .••.• $ •••• ~. 3 Limited Common Element5 ••••• ~.6 ••• " •••••••• 4" •••••• 4."' ........... 4; Description of Condcninium Unit •• W ...... H •••• ~.H.S ........ "'.H ... '" Condom!n!= ~ap ................................... 6 ............ 5 lnsepl'lt'Jibility of a Condominium Unit. •••• " ......... 7 •• ~ .......... " 5 Repsrate Assersment and Taxation - Noticb' to A5sesBor .............................. 6 •••••••••••• 6 Porm of O\tnership - Title ...... ~ ... ~ •••••••• ~ ••••••. 9 ....... ~.~ •• ~ 6 Non-Pr.rtitionability Bnd Transfer of. ~mrncn element.~~ ......... ~ ... ., •• e ......... * ••••• ~10 .. .,~~~ .... ~ .. " .... 6 Common Ele1lent.5 .............. ~ ............. ~ ......... ,,~ .. 11 .............. ~ .. 6 Use and Occupancy .............................. $ ........................ 12 ..... , " .. .. .. .. .. .... 6 Ea8ements ........................................... 1) .• ~ ..... ., .. ~ .. 7 Termination of Mechanlc l g Lien Rights and Indemnification •••••••••••••....•.. 14 .••••••••••• S C-olden Ridge CondGnliiniurt Association, IfiC ••••• q .. j5 •• ~ ............ "' ... 8 Re8ervation for Access - Maintenance, Repair Bnd Emergenciea~"'""'~~~,.~"' ... 4~.~ •• ~ ••••• 16.~.~ •• ,, •• ~ •• 9- M.aintenance and Service Regpongibility •••.•...... 17 •• ~ ...... ~ •. ~ 9 Compliance with Provisions of Dec18t'lition, By-Ll'lWB of the JI •• ociation ................................... IS •••••••••••• 11 Revocation or Amendment to Declaration.~ ......... 19 ......... H •• l1 A~ditionnf Alt~ration8 and Improvement~ - Genet'al and Limited Common f':lementB ........... :!O •••• ~ •••• H.12 1\l3fH~B8ment for Common £xpenees ••••.••• H ••••••••• :!1 ............. 12 Insurance ••.••••..•• "" ••• " ......................... :!2 ............ ,," 14 Own~r'B P~rflDn~l Oblig~tion tor Payment of AB8e5Bmentfl, ........... o •••••••• ~;!3~. '~~~~4~ ... "f6 A58e5sment LiEn •••.•• ~.~ •• ~ ~. R •••• ~~~. ~~ ••••••• ~.~:4 .. ~. ~ ... ~ ~. ~~ 16 Li~bility for Common Lxpenses upon TI:"l'in.Jfer of Condominium ia Joint.~ .... ~ .•••••. ~25.".~.*.~.-.~.17 Encumbrances - Priority ..••••• R •••••••••••••••••• 26 ........... o~18 Destruction, Damage ot" Obsolescence - Association as Atturney-in-Fact~~ ............. ,.27.~ .. _.~ •• " .... ~le Cond emna t ion •.•••. ~ •..•.• ~ • ~ •.•• ~ ~ • ~ ~ •••••..• ~ • ~ . 28 .. ~ • ~ ~ ~ .. ~ " ~ ., 2.1 .R~ 0 r 9 eo. n 1. Z /'j t ion •••• ~ .... ~ •• ~ ~ ••.• 8 •• ~ • ~ •••••••• ~ ••• 29. ~ ~ • ~ ~ • ~ • '" ., ~ 22 Reconlltruction and Repair ... ~ ••••• ~ ............. ~ •• 30~ ...... ~~,,~~ .. ~22 R~gi~tLBtion and !4!:Uinq Mdre\55.H .... ~ ......... 3L~~.~~~~ .. ~.22 Pf!l:riod of Condominium OwnerNhip.o ••••.... ,., ••••• 32 •.. ~ .... " •••• Z3 ADsessment R~'H!rVe& and Work C-npital Account·~~#.·q~?g •• ~ •.•• ~.~.~.< ....... J3."~~.,,~,,~,, .. "'2J R@liltrictive Covenllmttl BOO Obliq8tion~~.~., ......• J,L"'~ •• ~",.~~~~2J: AS80cia.tiof' Rl.ght to Acquire Mdltion611 Propllllrty ••• ~ ...... ., •••• ~~.~ •..••• " •• J:S~~.c •• ~~"'~~ .. 2S RPJcroationml Arn@ntti(l!m •••.• ~ •• ~~ ••••••••••••••• ,.)6.~,,"".~<>~,,~ ... 2b Condition of Pr~mt~~B ....... _ ..... "'C" ••••••••• J7~ •• , ••.. ~.6~2& Ge!n~r;;,l Fi!1l'!1lSrv{jtionf;""., •••• ,., •••• " ••.•• , •...• oJS~ •••••• $~ .... 26 "'-, : " .. '~-.~>I ,,'-' ~"'''-''-'~-J'- d, Buppl~nHrnt Condowirdt.mt Project. •••••....••.•.. 39 •• M.~~ .. "H.26 }\cct!?tnnc~ ot Prov iR iong of All D0c'.1mt'nt$ •.•••.•••••••• ~ •••.• ~ ••••. n.'.~~.40 •• ~.~ •• ~.~,,~27 GI" tl e 1:: .a 1 ••••••• , • , ••••• " •••••••• ~ ~ • ~ • ~ •• " , • " ••••• 0 .4 1 ••• ~ • " 0 , ••• ~ 2 e Exhibit h .. .................................................... 29 !'::;:;'l~~t 0, ••••. ,. P. ~ •• ~ ••• ~ •• ~ ~. ~ ••••• "'." ••••••• ~ •• ~ ••• ~. N' ~ ~ ~ 32 ?",'{ h ib! ':. '2 •••••• , ••••••••• ~ • ~ , • ~ ~ ...... ~ ••••. ¥ ~ • h ~ •••• ~ '" ~ •• ~ ~ •• ~ • ¢ J 7 E:X:hibit D •••• '. " ~ • c •• ~ • ~ • ~ •••• ~ ~ ..... ~ ~ ••• ~ •• ~ ~ ••• ~ ~ ¢ p ~ • ~ • ., ~ ~ ~. ~ 41 79f030Z0 CONDOMINIUM DeCLARATION O~ GOLDEN RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS KN~ ALL MeN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT WREREAS, Golden Group, a California General Partnership (hereinafter called -Declaranttl!) is the owner of that certain parcel of real property situated in the County of J~fferson, State of Colorado, being mOle particularly described on Exhibit" attached hereto an1 incorporated by reference herein~ WHEReAS, thp.r-e presently exists on said real property a one hundred ninety-two (192) unit rental apartment co~plex, which improvements arE commonly known as Golden Ridge Apartments; which land and improvements lire hereinafter called -Real Property· 1 and WHEREI\S, Declarant desires to convert sa id apartment complex into 8 condominium and to establish a condominium project under the Condominium Ownership Act of the State of Colorado1 and WHEREAS; Declarant deuires to establish a plan for the ownership in fee simple of real property estates; Bubject to the e8sements, restrictions, reservations, conditions, taxes and 8ssessments as set forth in this Declaration, conBisting of the at''!'' or space contained in each of the air space units in the building improvements and the co-ownership by the individual and separat«:! owners thereof, as tenants in common, all of which re­ m~ining property, is hereinll"':ter defined and ref~rred to as the ~common element5.~ NOW, THEREFORE, Decl.~'Jrant doee hereby publish and declare that the following terms, covenantsI' conditions, easem~nts, rl'!B­ tr ictions I useS, rpservat ions, 1 imi tl'J I: ions and obI igli tiona shall be del!!med to run with the land, shl'l11 be a burden Dnd l!. benefit to Declarant, its successorp and assigns, and any person acquiring or owning lin interest in the Real Property, their grantees, Buccessors, helr.s, executors, adminir:trators, deviaees or assigns.. 1. Submission to Condominium Ownership. Declarant, does hereby SUbmit the Real Property described above and the improve­ ments constructed thereon to condomintum ownership pursuant to the Condominium Ownership Act of the Stat·. of Color-lido. 2. D~finition •• Unless the context shall expressly prof/'ide otherwiser (a.) "'Unit"' means an individual air space unit co.nts·tned within the p-erimeter walls, floot'l5, ceilings, windowa anC! doo:t"_tlJ",oI lfi' unit, ot' other boundary linl"!8 shown on the condominiurr. map',. in, 81' building IHtuBted on the ReBl Pt"oP"!rty, and ,,8 e;hown lind dMcl"'tbed on l'l Condominium Map recorded in th& r~~ll prope'r-ty reco·t"\1'.r'-' dt J~ff.rson County, Colorado, togcth~r with (i) nIl fixturew ~Md improvelment51 thor-dn except fot" common phynicnl utility (l\;ci1l.tio::~~ (11) the inner decorated or: tlni~hed nur(Bces of such unit'fI p~rimeter wallE, floors and reilinglq and (11i) the intet"ior non­ &upporting '.d!!dls within the unit. The lerm 60elll not include, ho .... ever, the- un<.1ecorllted or unfinished f:lUr(lJC~R of th~ perim~ter wnlls, floon; or ceilingll of 11 unit, any utility fdcilities running .--~ 19103020 ~ I $, I throuqh the unit that serve more than on~ unit, or any other common eleme~t or part thereof locat~d within the unit. \ (b) IIICondominium Unit· Meana the fee simple interest .n~ title in and to • Unit, together "lth the undivided interest in the common elements appurtenant to such Unit, and all other rights and burdens created by this Declaration. (c) IiIOwner- mEans a per.on, pE'rsons, firm, corporation, partnership, association or other, legal entity, or any crmbination thereof, which own'.' an intere.t in one or more Condominium un i ts, but excl ud ing, ho\tever r any such pe r&on hav i n9 an in teres t therein merely lUI a Mortgagee (unless such Mortgagee has acquired fee simple title "0 a Condominiuna Unit pursuant to foreclosure or any proceeding. in lieu thereof). (dl ·Common elements· means and includes all of the Real Property and all the improvements now or hereinafter con­ s true ted thereon I exc 1 ud ing the Un i til. The common elemen ts ahall C'onsl.s:t o! th$ ;~:i~l:al common ttletflents and lim'ited common elements. "('he com1'llon elements shall be owned, liS tenants in COlU&On, by the Owner. of the separate Units, each Owner of a Unit havinq an undi­ v18ed interest in euch c()tft:lBon eleJl!lents a& is hereinafte:: p::::c·/i~.:::'~ (1) IIGeneral common elements" ",eans' llnd includes the Real Property d~8cribed on E~hibit A, the structural components of the buildings, including but not limited to the foundation_, girder., beam., supports, roc)fr t and bearing and .tructural walls1 the yards, gardenl, uncovert~d parking areas llnd storage spaces, chimneysl installations of cifntral .,,"icea Buch 8S power, light, 98S, hot And cold water, heatinq and air conditioningl the service roads, if anYI such improvements and portions of the buildinqa and areas therein as are provided for the community use, recreation, util i ty Bnd common use of all Owners 1 and all other parts of such rteal Property and the improvements thereon necessary or convenient to its existence, maintenanClf lJnd safety which are normally and ressonably in gen.eral common use, including the air above such land. The general common e-lements shall include all tangible physical properties
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Woods to Purchasejbond Issue Edsel Ford. Estate
    SAVE, FOOD TO THE NEWS HAS MO~D. , HELP FEED COME SEEUS IN OUR , 'P • NEW BUilDING, UNDER THE WORLD'S. ~Grosse 01 .News THE ELM AT 99 STARVING PEOPLE nte Complet~ News Coverag~ of. All the Pointes KERCHEVAL f VOLUME 7~O. 32 GROSSE POINTE, MICHIGAN. AUGUST a. 19% $2.00 Per Year-5c Per Copy Fully Paid Circulation ETTER STREEtS ARE ON THE WAY! - i;,~...... -------- .. 1 Park Youngster Sets Record.in Soap Box Derby tIIEADLINES. Woods To PurchaseJBond Issue ~ of IN ~.. WEEK I :. Edsel Ford. Estate t 'As CMllpiW ", IN ~1:3~~.~~~ ~.. G1'OIS' PoitU. Newl "-1: . List Shows How M~ney Is to i ...ThllJ'ldaT. AapsL 1 For Par k on Lake 8e Spent; Projects Lis{ed ltNRY J'ORD n &oswers Wlllt- I I d in Full for Readers erl:tWther'a invitation addre&$ed Date for Special E ection at Which Voters Wi! Deci e on to &1tomoblle manufacturers to I!t Bond .Issues to Be Named Next Monday The City of Grosse Pointe at i round table and d!:;eus waYs . has sold i'ts $300,000. bond is. and me&11I to increue production The Woods village ComnusslOners have decld~d, ~o go I. sue, authorized, by the voters .:!FOrd say. noth1Dc dolllC unW through with the purchase of the 43.7 acres of the ~dsel, to inaugurate a general, streP.t .t.rlies in 18 partI plantl which '11 d' thr.ten ~to ahut down p~uetlon Ford estate for a lake front park for the village and they WI repair an paving program, In lord a.re first o!ettJed ••.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rule Against Perpetuities and Its Application to a Private Trust
    Cleveland State Law Review Volume 1 Issue 2 Article 7 1952 The Rule Against Perpetuities and Its Application to a Private Trust Reuben M. Payne Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Estates and Trusts Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Recommended Citation Reuben M. Payne, The Rule Against Perpetuities and Its Application toa Private Trust, 1(2) Clev.-Marshall L. Rev. 59 (1952) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Rule Against Perpetuities and Its Application to a Private Trust by Reuben M. Payne* T ESTATOR DEVISED certain real property to his daughter in fee. Thereafter he executed a codicil whereby said devise was re- voked and the same property was devised to his son-in-law, in trust. Trustee was to hold it in trust for testator's daughter during the term of her life and in the event of death of daughter, son-in- law was to take possession of property, lease it, and use rents for support, education and benefits of the children of daughter. Daughter survived testator and gave birth to two additional children after testator's death. Held: the trust the testator at- tempted to create in his codicil was void as in violation of the Rule Against Perpetuities, where daughter survived testator and gave birth to two additional children after testator's death.' The court's decision is that a trust for private purpose must terminate within the period of the Rule Against Perpetuities.
    [Show full text]
  • Nysba Fall 2006 | Vol
    NYSBA FALL 2006 | VOL. 34 | NO. 2 N.Y. Real Property Law Journal A publication of the Real Property Law Section of the New York State Bar Association LLakeake GGeorgeeorge SSiteite ooff tthehe 22006006 SSummerummer MMeetingeeting Inside How Assignment Restrictions in Leases Apply to Real Property Transfer Tax and Mortgage Tax Traps in Corporate Transactions ........................................................................54 Conveyance of Condominium Units in New York City ..................89 (Joshua Stein) (Yosi (Joe) Benlevi) Nonprimary-Residence Holdover Proceedings ...............................63 RPLS Task Force on Attorney Escrows Current Practice, (Gerald Lebovits and Matthias W. Li) Alternatives and Improvements ...........................................................93 Roommates in New York Law ............................................................73 Model Bank Escrow Deposit Agreement .............................................98 (Gerald Lebovits) Extension of Reduced Real Estate Transfer Tax Rate for Subletting in New York Law ...............................................................79 Real Estate Investment Trusts .............................................................106 (Gerald Lebovits) BERGMAN ON MORTGAGE FORECLOSURES: Scenes from the Summer Meeting ......................................................81 Forgetting Assignment Proves Fatal ..................................................109 (Bruce J. Bergman) realprop-newsl-fall06.indd 1 11/21/2006 9:23:29 AM How Assignment Restrictions
    [Show full text]
  • 2005 Annual Report on the New York City Property
    The City of New York • Department of Finance • Office of Tax Policy Michael R. Bloomberg • Mayor Martha E. Stark • Commissioner ANNUAL REPORT ON THE NYC REAL PROPERTY TAX Fiscal Year 2005 MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG MAYOR MARTHA E. STARK COMMISSIONER REPORT PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF TAX POLICY AUGUST 2005 Table of Contents Fast Facts ………………………………………………………………………. i Highlights ………………………………………………………………………. ii Part I. Current Year Profiles …………………………………………. 1 Market and Assessed Value by Property Type ………………………….. 1 Exempt Value by Property Type ………………………………………... 7 Exemptions by Exemption Type ………………………………………… 13 Part II. Tax Levy ………………………………………………………… 25 Reconciliation of Assessment Roll, Tax Levy and Net Levy Billed ……. 27 Abatements by Property Type and Abatement Type ……………………. 28 Part III. Office Buildings ………………………………………………… 29 Part IV. Home Sales ……………………………………………………… 33 Part V. Cooperative and Condominium Tax Abatement Program ….. 35 Part VI. Delinquencies …………………………………………………… 36 Part VII. Building Permits ………………………………………………... 39 Part VIII. Historical Data ………………………………………………….. 41 Market Value by Tax Class and Borough FY 1993 – 2005 ……………… 41 Assessed Value by Tax Class FY 1991 – 2005 ………………………….. 42 Taxable Billable Assessed Value by Borough FY 1991 – 2005 ………… 43 Tax Levy by Tax Class FY 1991 – 2005 …………………………………. 44 Tax Rates FY 1991 – 2005 ……………………………………………….. 45 Tax Levy and Revenue FY 1991 – 2005 ………………………………….. 46 Unused Operating Margin FY 1991 – 2005 ……………………………… 47 Appendix ………………………………………………………………………… 48 The Real Property Tax
    [Show full text]
  • LIFE ESTATES and PRECATORY TRUSTS A. Creation of Life Estate
    LIFE ESTATES AND PRECATORY TRUSTS A. Creation of Life Estate upon Passing of Decedent. According to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (O.C.G.A.) § 44-6-80, estates that “extend during the life of a person but terminate at the death of the person are deemed life estates.”1 A life estate may be created by “deed or will” so long as the life estate does not exist in property that “will be destroyed [upon] being used.”2 Additionally, the life estate may last for the life of the tenant or for the life of some other person.3 Thus, the tenant of the life estate is entitled to the “full use and enjoyment of the property” so long as the life tenant is alive.4 When the life tenant passes, the life estate terminates and the right to present use or possession of the property will pass to either the “estate in remainder” or the “estate in reversion.”5 An estate in remainder is present if a party, other than the grantor and/or his heirs, receives the right to the use and the enjoyment of the property after termination of the the life estate.6 An estate in reversion exists if the right to use or enjoyment reverts back to the grantor and his heirs.7 Despite the legal distinction, the rights of the reversioner are the same as those of a vested remainderman in fee in Georgia.8 There is no technical requirement regarding what type of language is necessary for a testator to create a remainder.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rule Against Perpetuities: a Survey of State (And D.C.) Law
    THE RULE AGAINST PERPETUITIES: A SURVEY OF STATE (AND D.C.) LAW At common law, the rule against perpetuities provided that: No [nonvested property] interest is good unless it must vest, if at all, not later than 21 years after some life in being at the creation of the interest. Gray, The Rule Against Perpetuities § 201 (4th ed. 1942). Under the common law rule, the interest was invalid unless it was certain on the date the interest was created that it would vest within 21 years after the death of the last designated life in being at that time (the “common law period”). The common law rule ignored any events that occurred after the interest was created, and focused only on what was certain to occur or not to occur when the interest was created. The common law rule remains intact in only three states, however – Alabama, New York, and Texas. Three more states – Iowa, Mississippi and Oklahoma – have the common law rule, with the “wait-and-see” modification that determines whether an interest was valid based on whether it actually vested within the common law period, rather than whether it had to do so in all events. The beginning of the movement away from the common law rule began in 1979, when the Restatement (Second) of Property suggested that this approach was unreasonable, because it ignored events that, in some cases, had already occurred before the court or the parties had to determine the validity of the interests created. Restatement The Rule Against Perpetuities, 50-State Survey, Page 1 DISCLAIMER ON USE: The reader is cautioned to confirm the information provided in this Survey by independent research and analysis to ensure that it is accurate, complete, and current.
    [Show full text]
  • Condominiums and Cooperatives
    NYC Living: Coops and Condos HEIBERGER SDK ATTORNEYS AT LAW OFFERED BY: RE CREDITS, LLC PRESENTED BY: JAMIE HEIBERGER, ESQ SDK HEIBERGER, LLP 205 East 42nd St., 6th Floor, New York, NY 10017 475 Port Washington Blvd Port Washington, NY 11050 Direct: 212.532.2067 Mobile: 917.697.5853 1 Overview • Cooperative Apartment • Ownership • Due diligence • Board approval • Subletting • Loan documents in a co-op lendingHEIBERGER transaction • Condominium SDK ATTORNEYS AT LAW • Ownership of a condo unit • Condo waiver of Right of First Refusal • New Development Projects • Townhouses • Characteristics • Engineers Inspection • Legal Aspects • Due Diligence 2 HEIBERGER SDK ATTORNEYS AT LAW Co-Operatives 3 Form of Ownership • A cooperative corporation owns the real estate (land, buildings, and property rights and all interests). • title to the property, as shown on the deed, is in the name of the corporation • The ownership interest in a co-op is evidenced by shares of stock. • Ownership of cooperative stockHEIBERGER is essentially the same as stock in corporationsSDK such as Microsoft,ATTORNEYS Facebook, Yahoo, AT etc. LAW • However, accompanying the shares of stock in a cooperative is a proprietary lease granting the right of the shareholders to reside in a particular apartment. • Leasehold Coops (a Co-Op with a ground lease) 4 Proprietary lease- what does it mean to owners? • Rights and obligations included in proprietary lease and corporation bylaws • Receive proprietary lease • long-term lease or estate for years • Receive stock certificates HEIBERGER SDK ATTORNEYS AT LAW 5 Due Diligence • Financial Statements: • Each shareholder of the corporation is obligated to pay monthly maintenance charges which are aggregated and used to pay all costs and expenses in operating and maintaining the building.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule Against Perpetuities
    Sec. 2 ESTATES IN LAND AND FUTURE INTERESTS S229 3. The court mentions three possible constructions that could be placed on the “deed.” Under which one, if any, could Clarissa B. collect? Can you think of any other plausible constructions? Review the Note on the Words of Conveyance, supra, p. S167. 4. Once the court had decided that instrument was a deed and not a will, there are a number of possible constructions that could be placed on the interest which was given Clarissa B. The court distinguishes this conveyance from one granting a contingent remainder to Clarissa B., reserving a life estate in her husband. (Do you see how?) Yet ample authority exists for the proposition that an otherwise valid deed, stating that it is not to be effective until the death of the grantor, will be upheld, as reserving a life estate in the grantor and conveying a remainder in the grantee. 3 A.L.P. §§ 12.65, 12.95 n. 5. What interest does the court decide that Clarissa B. had? What are the possibilities? 4. The Rule Against Perpetuities At about the same time as the courts were reviving the doctrine of destructibility of contingent remainders, they also began to announce another doctrine which came to be known as the Rule Against Perpetuities. The first case in which the Rule was announced is generally thought to be the Duke of Norfolk’s Case, 3 Ch. Cas. 1, 22 Eng. Rep. 931 (1682). The reason for the origin of the Rule probably lies in the courts’ concern with the free alienability of land.
    [Show full text]
  • Listing Appointment Checklist
    75-hour New York Prelicense Course Syllabus Course Description This Pre-License course focuses on New York Real Estate Law and the everyday practice of Real Estate approved by the New York Real Estate Commission. This course covers all the subjects mandated by New York Real Estate License Law, for those interested in gaining their license. This course is expressly designed for, and geared to, all those potential licensees as defined by the New York Real Estate Commission, for the purpose of sitting for the real estate salesperson's exam. Anyone who assists or desires to assist others in the sale, leasing, management, or exchange of real estate must hold at least a real estate salesperson's license. Course Learning Objectives Unit 1: License Law Overview and Procedures for Licensing 1. State the purpose of the NY licensing law, the Department of State and the Board of Real Estate. 2. Explain the rules for obtaining a license in New York, state the types of licenses and their respective requirements. 3. Explain the New York real estate licensing exam requirements, procedures and policies. Unit 2: License Law Rules and Regulations 1. Define and explain the rules for license issuance, license information changes and branch office management. 2. Define and explain the rules for license renewal, continuing education and reciprocity. 3. Identify at least five Department regulations including handling of kickbacks and proper advertising. Unit 3: Unlicensed Assistants and License Law Violations 1. Name three allowed and three prohibited activities for unlicensed assistants and list at least five licensee activities that violate NY license law.
    [Show full text]
  • NYS TEST STUDY GUIDE Exam
    ABSTRACT This is a proprietary study guide created by the Alexander Anderson Center for Real Estate Education. This guide is intended for New Jersey real estate agents who wish to take their New York State real estate license NYS TEST STUDY GUIDE exam. Written by Coura For New Jersey Real Estate Agents Gaye-Sow Edited by Noelle Frieson Copyright © 2020 by the Alexander Anderson Center for Real Estate Education All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of the publisher. First, Congratulations! You are taking the first steps towards becoming a dual licensed agent in both New Jersey and New York states. To take your New York State exam you must mail in the necessary forms for your New York Real Estate Education Waiver along with your certificate of completion from your original real estate school. The NY forms are located in the back of this book. Please read all of the requirements and directions provided by New York State before sending in the forms. Upon successful completion of the NY required steps you will receive an education waiver which will allow you to take the NY State exam. Please note, you must be a licensed NJ real estate agent before you can request the education waiver for New York State. This packet contains the following: • A study packet for the NYS State Test. We here at the Center for Real Estate Education have compiled out the information from the NYS text book that is NYS specific.
    [Show full text]
  • Manchester, Vermont July 11 – 14, 2019 Equinox Golf Resort & Spa Manchester, VT Real Property Law Section Chair Gerard G
    NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION REAL PROPERTY LAW SECTION 9.0 MCLE Credits First-time Real Property Law Section Summer attendees enjoy a 50% discount for attorney meeting registration. You must be a member of the NYSBA RPLS to take advantage of this special offer. If you are not a member of NYSBA or the RPLS section you can become one by calling our Member Resource Center 800.582.2452. Summer Meeting Manchester, Vermont July 11 – 14, 2019 Equinox Golf Resort & Spa Manchester, VT www.nysba.org/RealSummer2019 Real Property Law Section Chair Gerard G. Antetomaso, Esq., Evans Fox LLP, Rochester, NY Program Chair Ira S. Goldenberg, Esq., Goldenberg & Selker, LLP, White Plains, NY TOTAL CLE CREDITS: Under New York’s MCLE rule, this program has been approved for a total of 9.0 MCLE credits consisting of 6.0 in Areas of Professional Practice, 2.0 in Ethics and 1.0 credit in Diversity, Inclusion and Elimination of Bias for experienced attorneys. Attorneys admitted 2 years or less are not eligible to receive credit in the Diversity, Inclusion and Elimination of Bias category. This program is not transitional and does not qualify for newly admitted attorneys. Hotel Information Equinox Golf Resort & Spa Manchester, VT The Equinox, a Luxury Collection Golf Resort & Spa is tucked into the Green Mountains in the picturesque town of Manchester, Vermont. The resort offers a definitive hospitality experience in southern Vermont with impeccable service and the latest in modern conveniences and amenities. A room block has been reserved for attendees of the RPLS Summer Meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • 14-99-00172-Cv ______
    Affirmed and Opinion filed May 3, 2001. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________ NO. 14-99-00172-CV ____________ PATRICIA A. GAIDES, Appellant V. FRANK CARL GAIDES, Appellee On Appeal from the 309th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 94-24154 O P I N I O N Appellant, Patricia A. Gaides, appeals from a judgment dividing the marital estate in her divorce from appellee, Frank Carl Gaides. Patricia contends in five issues that the trial court erred by: (1) refusing to divide the community estate disproportionately; (2) valuing community property improperly; (3) mischaracterizing separate property as community property; (4) failing to reimburse the community estate for alleged waste; and (5) exceeding its authority by ordering a division of the probate estate of the Gaides’ son. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Patricia A. Gaides and Frank Carl Gaides were married on February 8, 1964. The couple had three children, born in 1967, 1970, and 1974. Following the birth of their first child, only Frank worked outside the home, while Patricia had primary responsibility for the children’s care. In 1988, the couple separated, prompted by Patricia’s discovery that Frank was having an affair. Frank continued to deposit his paychecks into an account accessible to Patricia until March 1992, after which Patricia paid her living expenses through community accounts. In May 1994, Patricia initiated divorce proceedings. The case was tried to the court, which heard eleven days of testimony spanning a period from May through November, 1997.1 The trial court entered a Final Decree of Divorce on November 13, 1998, that included a division of property.
    [Show full text]