Kevin received his undergraduate degree in Finance from the University of Scranton. After graduation, Kevin worked at The Value Line, as a stock analyst covering small and midcap stocks. He next worked as a statistician at American Banker, a daily newspaper dedicated to the U.S. banking industry.
Starting in 1998, Kevin worked at Morgan Stanley as a financial analyst covering mutual funds for several years, later switching to covering institutional accounts.
Kevin left Morgan Stanley to attend Fordham University School of Law. After graduating from Fordham, Kevin worked at the Manhattan law firm of Thacher, Proffitt, & Wood, specializing in mortgage loan structured finance.
Kevin’s public service career began at the New York City Campaign Finance Board, where he worked as a Compliance Analyst during the 2009 citywide elections, investigating violations of Campaign Finance and Election law.
Kevin started working for the Courts as a Chamber Volunteer Attorney to the Honorable Justice Eileen A. Rakower and the Honorable Justice Manuel J. Mendez in Supreme Court, Civil Branch, New York County. Thereafter, Kevin joined Judge Mendez’s Chambers as a Court Attorney.
In February 2014, Kevin became the Principal Law Clerk to the Honorable Justice Judith N. McMahon, Administrative Judge of the Thirteenth Judicial District.
Kevin has been married for three years to his wife Alison, an attorney for the New York City Fire Department. They have a daughter, Arden.
Please see the attached notice if you are interested in running for director or treasurer of the RCBA.
Attached please find the March 6, 2014 Notice to the Bar reminding licensed New Jersey attorneys of the approaching March 28, 2014 deadline to timely submit their annual registration and payment. As with the earlier Notice, the Judiciary requests your assistance in sharing this Notice with your members.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation,
Michelle M. Smith, Esq.
Clerk of Superior Court
To my friends and colleagues:
For those of you who may be interested, I will be giving a lecture on Thursday, March 13, 2014 from 6:00PM to 9:00PM at the Queens County Bar Association. The lecture is entitled" What Every Attorney Should Know About the New York City Department of Buildings".
I have the good fortune of having on my panel the Honorable Philip S. Straniere, Supervising Judge of the Civil Court of the City of New York: Richmond County, and the Honorable Pamela Fisher, Judge of the Civil Court of the City of New York: King's County. Their input is invaluable in understanding the Judges' perspectives and insights on Department of Buildings matters, and how attorneys are impacted.
For those of you who are interested in attending, you can refer to the details contained in the flyer, or you can reach out to me personally.
18 Richmond Terrace
Hon. Judith N. McMahon
JCP 8, DCM 5, FCP
Law Clerk: Kevin Dowling
Part Clerk: Anthony Karakosta
Admin. Assistant: Linda Navallo-Donaldson
Prin. Secretary: Jean Callan
Hon. Leonard P. Rienzi
Supervising Justice of Richmond County, Criminal Term
Criminal Term - Part 6
Law Clerk: John Vitucci
Secretary: Beverly Stevenson
Hon. Thomas P. Aliotta
Appellate Term, Part 12, Part C 2
Law Clerk: Elyse VonEgloffstein
Part Clerk: Barbara Martinez
Secretary: Maureen Mazzuchelli
Hon. Stephen J. Rooney
Criminal Term - Part 5
Law Clerk: Michael Dwyer
Part Clerk: Carmine Taverna
Secretary: Susan Wieser
Hon. Robert J. Collini
Criminal Term - Part 12
Law Clerk: Mike Pulizotto
Secretary: Jaclyn R. Adler
Hon. Catherine M. DiDomenico
Matrimonial Part 11, IDV Part
Law Clerk: Ken Dale
Part Clerks: Robert Volpe, Robert Sigona
Secretary: Linda Hestness
Hon. Barbara I. Panepinto
Matrimonial Part 12
Law Clerk: Marjorie Steinberg
Part Clerk: Dominick Santore
Secretary: Christine Sohm
Hon. Desmond A. Green
DCM - Part 3
Law Clerk: Nadine Johnson
Part Clerk: Anne Buttacavoli
Secretary: Michael Bumpars
10 Richmond Terrace
Hon. Philip G. Minardo
Law Clerk: Robert Soos
Part Clerk: Brian Price
Secretary: Mary Ann Ciraulo
130 Stuyvesant Place
Hon. Kim Dollard
DCM - Part 4
Law Clerk: Christina Curry
Part Clerk: Jonathan Burdman
Secretary: Beverly Stevenson
Hon. Charles Troia
Trial Part 9, Special Part 5, Part 1G (Guardianship)
Law Clerk: Denise Marangos
Part Clerk: Paul Yu
Download link is at the bottom of this page.
December 7, 2013 - Sellers’ Concessions Revisited and New York State Bar Association Opinion 993
The New York State Bar Association Committee on Professional Ethics, in handing down Opinion 993 compels us to re-visit the issue of Sellers’ Concessions which the Richmond County Bar Association, most pointedly, had exhaustingly and satisfactorily vetted out over the past six (6) years. Rather than revisiting the findings of Opinions 817 and 882, which most real estate practitioners should be quite familiar with, this Article is intended to address Opinion 993, and the points made therein.
Opinion 993 was prompted by a joint inquiry made by a local Bar Association together with a local Association of Realtors, seeking guidance as to how a Contract should be crafted in order to be in compliance with Opinion 817 and its progeny. Opinion 993 correctly states that a Sellers’ Concession disclosure must be contained in the Contract of Sale, not in a Rider, but within the Contract.
The inquiry goes on to state that with full and proper disclosure of the Sellers’ Concession in the Contract, this has created “problems with various Lenders”. Respectfully, if full, accurate and transparent disclosure has created problems for the Lenders, perhaps it is the Lenders who should be re-thinking the issue of Sellers’ Concessions, rather than the attorneys who are drafting the Contracts, based upon terms that are presented to them while endeavouring to do so with full, accurate and transparent disclosure.
Opinion 993, in my humble opinion, misses the point. It attempts to draw a distinction between a situation where there is an a) increase in the purchase price and the concomitant amount of the Sellers’ Concession, and b) one where a Seller actually bears an economic cost reflected in the Sellers’ Concession. The Committee finds there to be a distinction, noting that the first scenario is the one where full, accurate and transparent disclosure is warranted.
Throughout the past six (6) years, as a real estate practitioner, that the issue of Sellers’ Concession has come up in the course of real estate brokers, primarily, putting together a real estate transaction, it has always been structured as being an increase in the purchase price and the concomitant amount of the Sellers’ Concession. Why? Because the primary objective has been to fictitiously increase the purchase price by a sum certain amount, while at the same time, providing for a Sellers’ Concession in the same sum certain amount, thereby resulting in a net zero gain to either party. The first question the Seller will typically ask is how much am I “netting” as a selling price, which amount is the gross selling price, as increased by the Sellers’ Concession, less the sum certain concomitant Sellers’ Concession amount, which therefore discounts, in all instances, the possibility that the transaction was structured whereby a Seller actually bears an economic cost reflected in the Sellers’ Concession. This is further corroborated by the fact that it is expected that the Purchaser will bear the increase in the transfer taxes attendant to the fictitious increase in the selling price.
In the landmark decision, LaSalle National Bank, N.A. v. Shearon, 23 Misc.3d 959 (2009), our own eminent Justice Joseph J. Maltese properly opined that Sellers' Concessions concede nothing. He went on to say that "a Sellers’ Concession as it is utilized in this transaction, is a misnomer with no foundation in logic or mathematics because the Seller concedes nothing to the Purchasers. In this case, the Sellers inflated the price of their home from $335,000 to $355,100 to allow the Shearons to borrow additional funds to close the transaction. The Sellers conceded nothing other than to act as co-conspirators to circumvent the Banking Law restrictions on the closing costs to mortgage ratios and to manipulate the public records of the true sales prices and market data. The manipulation of the true property value in the public record takes on particular significance because the sales prices are used as comparative prices in real estate appraisals that are used to evaluate other similar sales of homes in the area, as well as in estates, matrimonial matters and partition actions. This false data has been partially responsible for the inflated value of homes in low and middle income areas. By utilizing the Sellers’ Concession the true sales prices are inflated. The farce of this Sellers’ Concession is best illustrated where the Purchaser pays the Seller for any increase in the Seller's real estate transfer taxes resulting from the "so called" Concession. Indeed the Sellers did not even concede the additional tax liability associated with the higher listed "sales price."
Accordingly, and contrary to the findings in Opinion 993 where the Committee opined that the Attorney’s obligation as to full, accurate and transparent disclosure in crafting a Contract of Sale can vary from transaction to transaction, I would opine, in light of Shearon, that all Contracts of Sale require the same full, accurate and transparent disclosure, because to vary from this position only places the Attorney in harm’s way.
Rather than the Attorney having to conform to the resistance being met by the Mortgage Industry as to the issue of Sellers’ Concessions, it is time for the Mortgage Industry to recognize Sellers’ Concessions for what they really are, which are fictitious increases in a selling price with a zero sum gain to either party, designed exclusively as a tool to allow for a Purchaser to obtain a larger Mortgage than he or she would have otherwise been able to procure without a Sellers’ Concession.
But is this not what Justice Maltese prophetically stated as being one of the primary causes of the “mortgage meltdown”? Something to think about.
Download the article HERE
TAMARIN Robert P. Tamarin, Esq. of Westerleigh on February 21, 2014. Beloved husband of Clara. Loving father of Cheryl Sellitti, Halli Pellegrino, Mary Ellen Hill and Joanne Stanislawski. Cherished grandfather of Alicia and Rebecca Sellitti, Lawrence Levenberg, Maddie Turnell Pellegrino, Christopher and Michael Marchese Jr. Also survived by four great-grandchildren. Funeral From MATTHEW FUNERAL HOME INC., 2508 VICTORY BLVD. AT WILLOWBROOK RD. on Monday 11:30 A.M. Committal private. Friends may visit Sunday 2-4 and 7-9 P.M. In lieu of flowers donations to Memorial-Sloan Kettering Cancer Center would be appreciated. WWW.MATTHEWFUNERALHOME.COM www.SILive.com/obits
- See more at: http://obits.silive.com/obituaries/siadvance/obituary.aspx?pid=169800901#sthash.lmCdaJuB.dpuf
Applications must be submitted no later than April 11, 2014.
To All New York City Employers with four or more persons in his or her employment:
Under New York City Local Law 78 of the Laws of 2013 all employers in the City of New York having four or more employees (including independent contractors who carry out work in furtherance of the employer’s business) must provide reasonable accommodations to the needs of an employee for her pregnancy, childbirth or related medical condition. Reasonable accommodation is defined in the legislation and the burden of proving undue hardship in not providing reasonable accommodation shall be on the employer.
All such employers must also provide written notice of the right to be free from discrimination in relation to pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions to: (1) All new employees at commencement of employment and (2) To all existing employees. (Yes the law does not differentiate between employees- it says all).
The notice may also be conspicuously posted at an employer’s place of business in an area accessible to employees.
A copy of the written notice is available for download on the NYC Commission on Human Rights website:
This notice was kindly forwarded by:
Law Offices of John Wm. Zaccone
2141 Richmond Road
Staten Island, N.Y. 10306
Tel: (718) 351-3900