Virginia, Maryland & Washington DC

Cowherd PLC
  • Call Today
    703.884.2894
  • Home
  • Practice Areas
    • Construction Law
    • Community Associations Law
    • Neighbor Law
    • Property Litigation
  • About Cowherd PLC
    • Contact the Firm
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Meet John C. Cowherd
    • Website Disclaimer
  • Words of Conveyance Blog
    • Search by Topic
    • Subscribe to Receive Emails
  • Become A Client
Get in Touch

Tag: Trump Tower

Home / Trump Tower
Donald Trump is in the Condominium Business but he does not trust Owner Associations
August 19, 2015
Community Associations
Board of Directors, Common Areas, Community Assocations, Condominium, Condominium Documents, Contracts, Declaration, Donald Trump, Earnest Money Deposits, Fraud & Misrepresentation, Hotel Condominiums, Trump Organization, Trump Tower

Donald Trump is in the Condominium Business but he does not trust Owner Associations

Donald Trump’s colorful background in the business of condominium development speaks volumes about two topics:  (1) his track record as a real estate developer, and (2) the weaknesses of the community association model of real estate ownership.  There are many commentators writing about the political nuances of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.  Words of Conveyance is not a political blog.  Instead, this post focuses upon a recent federal lawsuit involving the Trump Organization that illustrates a few risks in condominium ownership. Donald Trump is in the condominium business but he does not trust owner associations.  As it turns out, Mr. Trump litigates in a similar way to his political campaigning.

Jacqueline Goldberg is a Certified Public Accountant who has invested over $10 million in real estate rental properties.  A Trump-controlled developer made condominiums available in the Trump Tower in Chicago, Illinois.  The Chicago Trump Tower’s 92 stories enclosed 486 residential units and 339 hotel condominium units.  In 2006, Ms. Goldberg signed contracts to purchase two hotel condominium units as investments.  Their prices were over $1.2 million and over $971,000, respectively.

8929167160_384ac9f4e9The marketing materials used Mr.  Trump’s personal brand to illustrate his personal involvement as an established, famous and successful developer.  The Chicago Trump Tower advertised luxury amenities including a 60,000 square foot health club, concierge, laundry, garage, meeting rooms, ballrooms with 30 foot ceilings, storage areas, and an executive lounge as common areas of the condominium association.  Since this was a hotel condominium, these common areas would be income generating assets and not merely perks available to owners or their tenants.  The declaration is the essential document that defines these respective property rights of different owners in the association.  This document defines which real estate elements are exclusively or commonly owned.

While the hotel condominium units in the Trump Tower were more expensive than most detached single family dwellings, Ms. Goldberg’s purchase contracts had some language that would make many real estate people nauseous.  The agreements provided that the, “[s]eller reserves the right, its sole and absolute discretion, to modify the Condominium Documents.” The Condominium Documents include the declaration, bylaws and floor plans.  The purchase contract only required Ms. Goldberg’s approval to change the Condominium Documents when specifically required by law.  Her risk was that the contract language gave Trump the unilateral authority to change the material terms of the deal.

After signing the purchase agreements, Ms. Goldberg learned that the Trump Organization made subsequent changes to the Declaration, removing the health club, concierge, laundry, meeting rooms, ballrooms, storage areas and executive lounge from the association’s common areas.  Perceiving a “bait- and-switch,” Ms. Goldberg refused to go to closing on the sale of the two units.

When the Trump Organization refused to return her $516,000 earnest money deposits, Ms. Goldberg filed a lawsuit.  The principal theory of her case was that the developer defrauded her by including the later-removed elements in the original package while never intending to keep them as common elements of the hotel condominium association.  In his defense, Mr. Trump insisted that the association could not be trusted with management of these elements of a mixed-use development:

Mr. Trump, a self-described “expert” on condominium developments, testified that based on his experience, he went into the Trump Tower project aware that “it can be very difficult” for a condominium board to manage function rooms, ballrooms, and food/beverage operations.  Mr. Trump explained that, as a general matter, condominium associations “can change their mind,” “fire managers,” “do lots of different things to create tremendous turmoil,” and “really ruin the operation very easily.” He further explained that if a condominium association fired a manager, “[i]t could become a disaster.”  This “has happened before, many times, where condo boards are involved and they can’t make a decision, they can’t hire a manager, and the whole thing goes to hell.”  This may affect not only the stability and profitability of the building, but also the Trump Organization.

Mr. Trump argued that these elements were originally included as common elements only as an oversight.  When he later figured this out, he transferred them over to one of his companies in order to prevent some association board of directors from ruining the Trump Tower for everyone.   To anyone unfamiliar with Mr. Trump’s personal bravado, these comments would sound outrageous.  How can a developer strong-arm luxury, income generating amenities away from a group of unit owners in the name of “protecting property values” against the incompetence of their neighbors? Yet, in Goldberg’s case, this argument worked.  Trump won the 2013 jury trial in the U.S.  District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  Goldberg then appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.  Judge Richard Posner, a well-known federal appeals court judge, wrote a June 10, 2014 opinion affirming the trial court decision.  He had some interesting observations about this case:

  1. “She signed with her eyes open.” Goldberg was an experienced real estate investor who should have understood the risks of signing the contracts with the “change clause.” The Court declined to paternalistically rewrite these contracts or condominium instruments made between these sophisticated investors. We know from the first Republican 2016 presidential debate that Mr. Trump’s businesses declared bankruptcy four times in order to discharge real estate loans.  Given Mr. Trump’s business practices and what was spelled out in the contracts, the Trump Tower units were speculative investments.
  2. “He is not infallible.” What is to be made of Mr. Trump’s decision to change the condominium instruments after Ms. Goldberg signed the agreements? Judge Posner observed that, “Donald Trump is of course a highly experienced real estate developer, but he is not infallible – he has had many successes in the real estate business but also failures.” Given Judge Posner’s reputation for use of a wry sense of humor in carefully written judicial opinions, one cannot help but believe that the Court had Mr. Trump’s bombastic style in mind here. Trump’s current presidential ambitions enhance the irony.
  3. No Real Expectation of Profit. For Ms. Goldberg’s securities laws claims to prevail, there must have been an expectation of profits from the disputed common elements.  Judge Posner observed that Ms. Goldberg’s share of the projected profits would have been so small that her share of the annual maintenance fees would have been adjusted by at most 3%.  He was not persuaded that the amounts in controversy were more than speculation.

For most people, opportunities to invest in condominium units do not involve the complex issues found in a Trump Tower.  However, even commonplace initial purchases of units from a residential condominium developer involve substantial risks.  One cannot conduct home inspections for properties that have not yet been built.  The developer (or some other investor) may enjoy an oppressive supermajority vote in the governance of the owners’ association.  There may be ambiguity in the Condominium Documents.  Since seasoned investors like Jackie Goldberg experienced heartburn, there’s all the more reason for others to have advisors help them navigate such an investment.  In a post-trial interview with the Chicago Tribune, Goldberg said she felt good about “exposing” Trump and offered this advice for anyone going into business with him: “Read the contract.”

As a presidential candidate, Mr. Trump lacks political electoral experience.  However, the Goldberg case shows that Mr. Trump does have a governance background within his real estate dominion.  Industry people espouse that community associations are “mini-governments” that alleviate the burdens on cities and counties while permitting neighborhoods to enjoy autonomy on how things are run on democratic principles.  If condominium associations are indeed analogous to political democracy, what does Ms. Goldberg’s case say about how a Trump White House would treat other organs of government?

Case Citations:

Goldberg v. 401 North Wabash Venture LLC, 755 F.3d 456 (7th Cir. 2014)

Goldberg v. 401 North Wabash Venture LLC, 904 F. Supp. 2d 820 (N.D. Ill. 2012)

Photo Credits:

Donald Trump via photopin (license)

Trump Tower via photopin (license)

Continue Reading
Share

Search by Category

  • Community Associations
  • Construction & Renovation
  • Foreclosures
  • Land Use & Zoning
  • Landlord-Tenant
  • Litigation
  • Neighbor Relations
  • Uncategorized
Archive
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • December 2024
  • October 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • November 2023
  • June 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • October 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • September 2017
  • July 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
Categories
  • Community Associations
  • Construction & Renovation
  • Foreclosures
  • Land Use & Zoning
  • Landlord-Tenant
  • Litigation
  • Neighbor Relations
  • Uncategorized
Pages
  • About Cowherd PLC
  • Blog Archive
  • Community Associations Law
  • Construction Law
  • Contact the Firm
  • Cowherd PLC – Representing the Interests of Property Owners
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Meet John C. Cowherd
  • Neighbor Law
  • Property Litigation
  • Search by Topic
  • Subscribe to Receive Emails
  • Testimonials
  • Website Disclaimer
  • Words of Conveyance

Copyright 2024. Cowherd, PLC. Website by Jonas Marketing

  • Home
  • Practice Areas
    • Construction Law
    • Community Associations Law
    • Neighbor Law
    • Property Litigation
  • About Cowherd PLC
    • Contact the Firm
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Meet John C. Cowherd
    • Website Disclaimer
  • Words of Conveyance Blog
    • Search by Topic
    • Subscribe to Receive Emails
  • Become A Client