More than thirty-three years ago, our firm was founded. Early on, we made a decision – when it came to residential matters, we would only represent the owner, manager, developer side of the equation. We were approached by many tenants asking that we represent them on litigation, administrative proceedings and buy-out negotiations. We were young, excited and hungry for business. Representing tenants could prove lucrative and provide some of the business that a newly formed law firm would want. But we decided that our residential client base was the real estate industry. We would not handle matters for residential tenants.
Creating negative legal precedent for our real estate clients would be antithetical to our vigorous representation of them. Holding up a development site by demanding an exorbitant buyout was simply something that we would not do. For more than three decades, we have loyally represented The Real Estate Industry and have never regretted that decision for an instant.
Interestingly, most of the name brand “tenant law firms” adhere to a strict rule as to whom they will represent – residential tenants only. Shouldn’t that be the case on the property owner side as well?
Many of our competitors hold themselves out as legal representatives of the real estate industry as well. But are they? It is surprising the frequency with which we find our firm opposing these firms, as they represent residential tenants and take legal positions that would be disastrous for the real industry, or read articles describing how these self-styled “landlord firms” are impeding development.
These are perilous times for the real estate industry. At both the City and State level, the legislatures seem intent on passing laws that are hurtful to our owner clients. It is important that members of the real estate industry consider who their counsel are and if they are truly loyal to the positions that they take or are simply willing to sell their time and legal efforts to the highest bidder.
