The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York recently ruled on a case involving unpaid common charges at the Washington Court Condominium. The court's decision affects condominium owners and boards across New York, clarifying the responsibilities of unit owners regarding payment of common charges.
The case, Board of Managers of Washington Court Condominium v. Carl, was filed under docket number Index No. 160615/24. The ruling was issued on June 23, 2026, and it addresses a dispute between the condominium board and a unit owner, Bernard J. Carl, among others. The court's decision is significant as it reinforces the authority of condominium boards to collect unpaid assessments.
Background
The Board of Managers of Washington Court Condominium, the respondent in this case, took legal action against Carl and other defendants for failing to pay common charges associated with their condominium unit. Common charges are fees that all unit owners are required to pay for the maintenance and operation of shared facilities and services in a condominium.
The dispute arose when the board filed for summary judgment, seeking to establish the defendants' liability for the unpaid charges. The case reached the Appellate Division after the Supreme Court of New York County, presided over by Judge Francis A. Kahn III, granted the board's motion for summary judgment on January 14, 2026. The defendants subsequently appealed the decision.
The Ruling
The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the lower court's ruling, which granted the Board of Managers summary judgment regarding liability for the unpaid common charges. The judges involved in this decision included Renwick, P.J., Scarpulla, González, and Rodriguez.
The court noted that the board had established a prima facie case against the defendants by providing evidence of its authority to collect assessments, invoices reflecting the defendants' account, and an affidavit confirming the defendants' failure to pay. The court stated, "The burden then shifted to defendants to demonstrate a triable issue of fact as to a bona fide defense to the action..." However, the defendants did not successfully raise any triable issue of fact regarding their liability.
While the defendants acknowledged that they had not paid some common charges, they argued that the amount owed was less than what the board claimed due to an abatement clause in the condominium bylaws. The court clarified that since the defendants only contested the amount owed, the appropriate action was to refer the matter to a referee to determine the exact amount due.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for condominium owners and boards in New York. It reinforces the ability of condominium boards to pursue legal action against owners for unpaid common charges. The decision emphasizes that unit owners must pay their assessments and that disputes regarding the amount owed can be resolved through a referee rather than delaying the collection process.
The court's ruling also sets a precedent for future cases involving unpaid common charges. It clarifies that challenges to the amount owed should not impede the board's ability to collect dues, as long as the board can demonstrate its authority and the existence of unpaid charges. This decision may encourage other condominium boards to take similar actions against delinquent owners, knowing that the courts will support their right to collect unpaid assessments.
What's Next
The defendants in this case may consider appealing the ruling to a higher court, although details regarding any potential appeal were not provided in the court filing. Additionally, the court's decision may lead to further related cases as other condominium owners and boards look to enforce their rights regarding unpaid common charges.