Ed, Co-Chair of the firm’s Real Estate Practice Group, practices in the area of commercial real estate, commercial lending, and transactional matters. Ed regularly represents developers and investors in the purchase, sale, and development of real property. 

Lily focuses her practice on real estate and transactional law, as well as municipal and governmental law. She manages complex transactions, including public and public/private real estate negotiations, acquisitions, and developments. Additionally, she represents private clients in the acquisition, sale, leasing, financing, and development of property, as well as providing guidance on the formation and regulation of condominiums and homeowners’ associations.

The 2024 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Real Estate Lawyers guide is a respected publication that recognizes lawyers who have shown exceptional skill in real estate-related practices. Their selection process involves rigorous research, including submissions from peers and analysis by Lawdragon’s editorial team. The guide is an essential resource for identifying top legal professionals in the real estate sector, highlighting those who excel in areas such as transactions, development, and finance​.

To view the full guide, click here.

The post Firm Partners Eduardo Soto and Lillian Arango Recognized in 2024 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global Real Estate Lawyers Guide appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Of the 47 lawyers recognized, 12 of the firm’s attorneys were recognized for the very first time and 14 attorneys were recognized as Ones to Watch. 

Best Lawyers has employed the same transparent methodology for more than 35 years, based entirely on peer review. 

The following includes all Firm attorneys named and areas in which they are recognized:

Miami

• Mitchell A. Bierman (Administrative / Regulatory Law, Government Contracts, Government Relations Practice)
• Lillian Arango (Real Estate Law)
• Maria Victoria Currais (Real Estate Law)
• Jeffrey Decarlo (Commercial Litigation, Public Finance Law)
• Alan K. Fertel (Sports Law)
• Chad S. Friedman (Land Use and Zoning Law, Real Estate Law)
• Jessika Arce Graham (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law)
• Edward G. Guedes (Appellate Practice)
• Stephen J. Helfman (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Juan P. Loumiet (Litigation – Real Estate, Real Estate Law)
• Justin Luger (Commercial Litigation)
• Anthony L. Recio (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Paul Ryder (Employment Law – Management)
• Clifford A. Schulman (Environmental Law, Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Joseph H. Serota (Commercial Litigation)
• Eduardo M. Soto (Real Estate Law)
• Richard Jay Weiss (Government Relations Practice)
• Laura K. Wendell (Appellate Practice)
• David M. Wolpin (Employment Law – Management, Government Relations Practice)
• Daniela Cimo (Ones to Watch: Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Kelsie Elmer (Ones to Watch: Real Estate Law)
• Roger C. Pou (Ones to Watch: Municipal Law)
• Samantha W. Soto (Ones to Watch: Labor and Employment Law – Management, Litigation – Labor and Employment)
• Alejandro Uribe (Ones to Watch: Land Use and Zoning Law)

Fort Lauderdale

• Daniel L. Abbott (Litigation – Land Use and Zoning)
• Mitchell J. Burnstein (Commercial Litigation, Eminent Domain and Condemnation Law)
• Jamie A. Cole (Commercial Litigation)
• Alicia Gonzalez (Real Estate Law)
• Paul Gougelman (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Michael J. Kurzman (Construction Law, Litigation – Construction)
• Matthew H. Mandel (Commercial Litigation)
• Eric L. Stettin (Commercial Litigation)
• Susan L. Trevarthen (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Peter D. Waldman (Eminent Domain and Condemnation Law)
• Isabella Falcon (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)
• Anne Reilly Flanigan (Ones to Watch: Appellate Practice, Civil Rights Law, Commercial Litigation)
• Narinah Jean-Baptiste (Ones to Watch: Municipal Law)
• Bryan C. Siddique (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)
• Alison F. Smith (Ones to Watch: Labor and Employment Law – Management)
• Blayne Yudis (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)

Boca Raton

• Howard D. Dubosar (Commercial Litigation, Litigation – Bankruptcy)
• Andrew S. Maurodis (Land Use and Zoning Law)
• Brett J. Schneider (Employment Law – Management, Labor Law – Union, Litigation – Labor and Employment)
• David N. Tolces (Real Estate Law)
• Ethan Goldstein (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)
• Ryan Hudak (Ones to Watch: Labor and Employment Law – Management)
• Jeremy S. Rosner (Ones to Watch: Commercial Litigation)

The post WSHC+B Attorneys Selected for Inclusion in the Best Lawyers in America 2025 appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Change 1: Termination of Tenancy Without Specific Terms

Section 83.57 addresses the Termination of tenancy without specific terms, directing how either party can terminate a lease without a specific duration. Such a tenancy can be terminated by either party giving written notice to the other party within any of the following timeframes:

1. When the tenancy is from year to year, by giving not less than 60 days’ notice prior to the end of any annual period;
2. When the tenancy is from quarter to quarter, by giving not less than 30 days’ notice prior to the end of any quarterly period;
3. When the tenancy is from month to month, by giving not less than 30 days’ notice prior to the end of any monthly period; and
4. When the tenancy is from week to week, by giving not less than 7 days’ notice prior to the end of any weekly period.

Previously, 83.57(3) gave either party no less than 15 days’ notice before the end of any monthly period to terminate a month-to-month tenancy. The modification to 83.57(3), as shown above, increases the statutory requirement of notice to 30 days prior to the end of any monthly period when terminating a month-to-month tenancy. However, no change was made to when the monthly period begins and ends, remaining the date when the monthly payment is due. So, if rent is due on the 15th day of March, the notice must have been given at the latest on the 13th day of February (accounting for a 28-day month) to satisfy adequate notice of lease termination.

Change 2: Termination of Tenancy With Duration

Section 83.575 addresses Termination with a specific duration, governing how the parties to a residential lease can terminate a lease with a defined start and end date. This section contemplates a situation in which the lease agreement specifies a notice period for termination:

1. A rental agreement with a specific duration may contain a provision requiring the tenant to notify the landlord within a specified period before vacating the premises at the end of the rental agreement, if such provision requires the landlord to notify the tenant within such notice period if the rental agreement will not be renewed; however, a rental agreement may not require less than 30 days’ notice or more than 60 days’ notice from either the tenant or the landlord.

Previously, the notice period for termination of a lease with a specific duration only provided for a maximum notice of 60 days. Neither party was obligated to provide a minimum amount of notice upon termination of the lease. The revision adds a minimum amount of notice of 30 days by either party while still providing the maximum amount of days, 60, for requisite notice of termination. Here, either party must provide notice of termination a minimum of 30 days before, but may still provide 60 days notice before termination. So, if the lease renews on the 1^st of the month, the notice must have been given at least 30 Calendar days before that date, but could have been given at most 60 days prior to that date.

These changes to notice requirements are key for both the landlord and tenant in order to properly and timely terminate a residential tenancy.

The information contained in this document does not constitute legal advice. 

This client alert was written with the assistance of Emma Rodgers. Emma is a legal intern in the Real Estate division and is an LL.M. candidate in Real Property Development at The University of Miami School of Law. 

The post Client Alert: Important Changes to The Florida Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (Part II of Chapter 83 Florida Statutes) appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

On May 8, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed Senate Bill 264 codified at Chapter 2023-33, Laws of Florida (the act) into law. This new legislation introduced, among other measures, new restrictions to the sale of Florida real estate to certain foreign entities and individuals. Attorneys, title companies, brokers as well as other players in the real estate industry need to familiarize themselves with this new legislation to ensure compliance and avoid possible penalties.

S.B. 264 added a new Part III titled “Conveyances to Foreign Entities” to the existing Chapter 692 of the Florida Statutes which deals with “Conveyances by or to Particular Entities.” The new Part III includes five new sections (Fla. Stat. Sections 692.201-692.205), the first of which is a definitions section.

The act, which becomes effective July 1, prohibits the purchase of certain Florida real estate by “foreign principals” of “foreign countries of concern”, namely “the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Cuba, the Venezuelan regime of Nicolás Maduro, or the Syrian Arab Republic.”’

“Foreign principals” are very broadly defined in Section 692.201 as the government of a foreign country of concern; a member of a political party of a foreign country of concern; any foreign entity incorporated in a foreign country of concern, and, with a catch-all definition, “any person who is domiciled in a foreign country of concern and is not a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States.” Entities incorporated by any of the foreign principals defined above are also deemed to be a foreign principal.

Prohibition on the Acquisition of Agricultural Land—Fla. Stat. Section 692.202
Foreign principals are barred from, directly or indirectly, acquiring agricultural land. The Senate analysis cites national security and food security concerns as the rationale for this ban. In each instance in which a transfer of agricultural land takes place, a buyer’s affidavit will be required in which the buyer will attest that it is not a foreign principal and it is otherwise in compliance with the new law. From a practitioner’s standpoint, it is important to note that § 692.202, expressly states that the failure to obtain the affidavit will not create a title defect or affect insurability. This is useful guidance when representing a purchaser who is acquiring land from a foreign principal as the act seems focused only on the buy-side of the transaction. Also, the closing agent is exempted from civil or criminal liability for the noncompliance, except in the case the closing agent had actual knowledge that the buyer is a foreign principal.

Foreign principals who owned agricultural land prior to the July 1 are allowed to continue owning such land, but they will not be allowed to acquire additional land and will have until July 1, 2024, to register with the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Failure to register can result in a civil penalty of $1,000 per day of noncompliance. Additionally, agricultural land acquired in violation of the ban may result in forfeiture of the property to the state. Enforcement is delegated to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services which is empowered to file a lis pendens and petition the circuit court of applicable jurisdiction to enter an order of forfeiture. In case of forfeiture, the state acquires the property subject to the rights of any lienholders.

Prohibition on the Acquisition of Property Near Military Installations or Critical Infrastructure—Fla. Stat. Section 692.203
Foreign principals are also prohibited from acquiring property interests, when the property lies within 10 miles of a military installation or critical infrastructure facility. The concern here is that foreign principals may use the land to monitor activities at such military installations and study vulnerabilities of critical infrastructure.

A critical infrastructure facility is defined through a list of 10 items, including electrical power plants, water treatment facilities, seaports and airports. Foreign principals that own property interests within 10 miles of a military installation or critical infrastructure facility as of July 1 will have the obligation to register with the Department of Economic Opportunity. The deadline here is Dec. 31, and a report will be deemed late if filed after Jan. 31, 2024. The civil penalty for failure to register is, again, $1,000 per day, which the Department of Economic Opportunity can collect by placing a lien against the property.

The new Section 692.203 contains a limited residential property exemption. Foreign principals can acquire residential real property, up to two acres in size, if the foreign principal holds a U.S. visa and the residential real property is not located within five miles of a military installation.

What is striking is that this exemption does not carve out high-density residential areas. This will create significant impact in the city of Doral, for example, which is home to a large Venezuelan community (many of whom are here on a visa) as well as the U.S. Southern Command.

A de minimis exemption exists for the acquisition of equity interests of publicly traded companies, when the equity interest represents less than 5% of the registered securities of the publicly traded entity. The de minimis exemption, as drafted, would not cover the acquisition of an equity interest in a closely-held business when one of the business assets (albeit ancillary) is Florida real estate. Such an acquisition by a foreign principal, at present, would be barred. The de minimis exemption also applies to the ban on agricultural land purchases discussed above.

Property can be acquired by a foreign principal by descent or through the enforcement of liens, although for a limited time. There is a requirement for a foreign principal to divest within three years after the property is so acquired (this applies also for agricultural land). In the residential context, this could lead to troubling results, for example when minor children of a foreign principal inherits an interest in residential property located within five miles of an airport. The requirement of an affidavit of compliance upon the sale of property and the potential of forfeiture are also present in this section.

Prohibition on the Acquisition of Property by Chinese Concerns—Fla. Stat. Section 692.204
The new Section 692.204 follows the structure and content of the previously discussed sections, but it extends the ban to the acquisition of all real property located within the state of Florida to entities or individuals who are domiciled in the People’s Republic of China.

Conclusions
The act will come into effect on July 1 and is certain to impact the South Florida real estate market. The requirement to register properties already owned, with steep penalties for noncompliance, will generate significant discontent if the government takes an unforgiving approach for nonwillful violations. Also, the requirement to divest properties acquired by devise or descent could be challenged on constitutional, due process grounds.

In the coming months, we can certainly expect to hear more on the effects, intended or unintended, of this new law. In the meantime, professionals in the real estate industry should do their best to stay compliant with the new legislation.

Fabio Giallanza is a corporate and real estate attorney at Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman. He represents businesses and investors in the acquisition and financing of property, along with business transactions and corporate matters. Giallanza specializes in cross-border transactions involving clients based in the United States, Europe and Latin America.

Read the original article in the Daily Business Review here.

The post Fabio Giallanza authors article in the Daily Business Review discussing restrictions to sales of Florida real estate to certain foreign nationals appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

In the article, Joe comments that his condominium association clients saw increases of 30% to 40% last year, “Ultimately when casualty insurers suffer underwriting losses, you know, they make it up… I think that is a concern.”

Joe has developed a particular niche representing condominium associations and coordinates a multi-disciplinary approach in order to counsel clients in navigating the myriad of legal issues they face with respect to condominium law and community association matters, including turnovers, dispute resolution, casualties, and construction defects issues.

Read the full article here.

The post Joseph M. Hernandez discusses the increasing rates of insurance policies condominium owners will face in the wake of the destruction caused by Hurricane Ian appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Joe addressed the probable increase in costs required for upkeep in older condos. “When Champlain happened, it just put the whole thing in overdrive,” he said. “Now there are going to be mandatory reserves. What was already an unfavorable situation for residents in older buildings is now even more so.”

When asked if the growing expense facing owners and associations could affect the future of condo living he said, “I don’t think so.” 

“There seems to be a healthy demand for good projects that are well located,” Joe said. “If the associations take the right steps to build up reserves early, then it can work.”

Joe is a sought-after transactional real estate lawyer and has developed a particular niche representing condominium associations and cooperative corporations being pursued by developers for acquisition of the units and termination of the condominium or cooperative.

Read more: https://www.sun-sentinel.com/real-estate/fl-bz-condo-safety-sales-20220725-gy4wm5onprgyljbnuxgzpdacam-story.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss

The post Joseph M. Hernandez discusses the post-legislation outlook for condominium owners and associations appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Juan is a seasoned attorney whose real estate, hospitality, corporate, and finance career spans decades. Juan represents developers of high-end hotels, resorts and mixed-use projects in the U.S., the Caribbean and Latin America, negotiating complex joint ventures, hotel and resort management agreements, loans and leases.

 Cayla represents hotel, condominium and retail developers in commercial real estate development and financing transactions, joint venture deals, acquisitions, dispositions and leasing matters. She earned her J.D. and an M.B.A. in Finance from Nova Southeastern University in 2018.

The post Juan Loumiet and Cayla Ross secure licensing and construction agreement for NoMad Residences Wynwood appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

Despite preventative HOA rules, many homeowners can’t resist renting out their idyllic ocean-side units. Joe, who represents the owners’ association at a 250-unit condominium, explained that the oceanfront community where the condo is located has gotten “a lot of cases where buildings that were meant to be apartments were actually becoming transient-use hotels, and it was leading to a lot of problems.” While citizens should follow rules and regulations related to Airbnb, developing a high-rise condo that has determined short-term rental rules from the start can minimize conflicts.

As a sought-after transactional real estate and business lawyer, Joe has developed a particular niche representing condominium associations and cooperative corporations being pursued by developers for acquisition of the units and termination of the condominium or cooperative. He coordinates a multi-disciplinary approach in order to counsel clients in navigating the myriad of legal issues faced by associations and unit owners in these situations. He also represents condominium associations, community associations, developers of condominium projects, and groups of unit owners in a variety of condominium law and community association matters, including turnovers, dispute resolution, casualties, and construction defects issues.

Click here to read more.

The post Joseph M. Hernandez discusses conflicting perspectives on short-term rental restrictions in Miami appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

The program bridges the gap between what law students learn in school and what they need to know to hit the ground running as legal practitioners with hands-on experience, a necessity in South Florida’s booming real estate market.

The 22-member advisory board consists of professionals from prominent law firms and major real estate companies, along with developers, banking and financial services professionals, architects, designers, title insurance agents, and construction professionals. Members work in coordination with the curriculum to provide students with access to mentorship, internships, and job opportunities.  

Joe Hernandez is a sought-after transactional real estate lawyer and leads the firm’s real estate practice.

Click here to read the full article.

The post Joe Hernandez Selected to join University of Miami’s Master of Laws in Real Property Development advisory board appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.

The “Best Law Firms” list recognizes firms for their professional excellence and consistently compelling ratings from clients and peers. In order to rank in the list, a firm must have a lawyer listed in The Best Lawyers in America®, which acknowledges the top five percent of practicing U.S. attorneys. Earlier this year, the firm had 25 lawyers selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® (click here for the full list).

Firms are ranked on a national and metropolitan scale by tiers. The firm received the following rankings:

National Tier 1

• Appellate Practice

National Tier 2

• Land Use & Zoning Law

Metropolitan Tiers

Miami

• Appellate Practice
• Commercial Litigation
• Employment Law – Management
• Environmental Law
• Government Relations Practice
• Land Use & Zoning Law
• Litigation – Labor & Employment
• Real Estate Law

Fort Lauderdale

• Commercial Litigation
• Construction Law

The post WSHC+B Ranked Among “Best Law Firms” by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® appeared first on Weiss Serota Helfman Cole + Bierman.