New York: (631) 761-0800Florida: (561) 899-0222


Firm Attorneys Closed a $39,100,000 Sale of a Mixed Use Property in Long Island City, New York together with Like-Kind Exchange Purchase of Farmingdale, New York Property

Matt Lamstein and Jessica Moore of the Firm’s Real Estate Practice Group closed the sale of a mixed use property in Long Island City, New York at a purchase price of $39,100,000. Mr. Lamstein and Ms. Moore thereafter represented the client in its acquisition of an office/industrial building in Farmingdale, New York. The acquisition also included a like-kind exchange as well as Industrial Development Agency benefits.

Firm Attorneys Closed a $43,000,000 Financing for a 26 Dunkin’ Donut® Franchise Acquisition

Matt Lamstein and Tara Primis of the Firm’s Real Estate Practice Group, together with William Gartland and Max Sender of the Firm’s Corporate and Business Practice Group, closed the $43,000,000 financing of the acquisition of 26 Dunkin’ Donut® locations in the Albany, New York region. The Firm represented a national based lender in its providing both acquisition and asset based financing. The transaction also included a syndication/participation with two other regional banks.

Lazer, Aptheker, Rosella & Yedid, P.C. and Tullio & Partners Agree to Cross-Border Synergy

Lazer, Aptheker, Rosella & Yedid, P.C. and Tullio & Partners are pleased to announce the beginning of an ongoing relationship bringing together two firms with decades of expertise to provide multidisciplinary international legal assistance, including commercial law, corporate and business transactions, real estate, litigation, and arbitration. With over 40 attorneys between their offices in New York, Melville, West Palm Beach, Milan, Modena, Treviso, and Buenos Aires, along with a network of foreign consultants and experts in Asia, the ongoing relationship between Lazer Aptheker and Tullio & Partners will provide clients strong international representation and the ability to satisfy legal needs all around the world. “This relationship represents an important opportunity to consolidate and energize our vocation towards international horizons, and to share a development plan that will involve more professionals beyond national borders. We strongly encouraged this synergy between our practices, as an important step towards the construction of a new integrated reality, which will combine quality and efficiency with a state-of-the art and multinational vision of services that we will offer to our clients” – Prof. Antonio Tullio, Managing Partner, Tullio & Partners. “As our clients’ needs develop to be more and more reliant on global markets and norms, Lazer Aptheker is dedicated to taking steps that will provide the best representation possible for our clients in all respects. We are excited to work with Tullio & Partners, and proud that we can continue to provide our clients access to award winning representation across four continents.” – Ralph Rosella, Managing Partner, Lazer, Aptheker, Rosella & Yedid, P.C. Founded in 1987, Lazer, Aptheker, Rosella & Yedid, P.C. is a full-service law firm with attorneys in New York and Florida practicing in over a dozen practice areas. With offices in Modena, Milan, Treviso, New York, and Buenos Aires, Tullio & Partners is a full service law firm offering judicial and transactional legal assistance along with counselling services in international, EU, and Italian law.

Robin S. Abramowitz Successful on Motion for Summary Judgment in Mortgage Foreclosure Action Where Defendant Claimed 90 Day Notice Not Served

Robin S. Abramowitz of the Firm’s Litigation Practice Group was successful on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment where defendant opposed the motion on the basis that a 90 day notice pursuant to RPAPL §1304 was not served. Defendant claimed the failure to serve a 90 day notice as mandated by RPAPL §1304 before commencing the foreclosure action required denial of the motion and dismissal of the complaint.  In rejecting the argument, the court found that, as was noted by the attorneys for the plaintiff, plaintiff was not a lender, assignee or mortgage loan servicer  as defined under RPAPL §1034 and Banking Law §590 and, therefore, it was not required to provide §1304 notice before commencing the action. Thus, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to foreclosure on the note and the mortgage and for an order of reference.
1 2 3 49