First published: Mar 2026
251 Days Over Deadline
TAKEAWAY Boards should regularly update their alteration agreements to effectively manage risks associated with owner renovations such as damage to common elements, alignment with updated declarations and by-laws, incorporation of modern technology, and liability management. In this case, the record reflects that the managing member of the limited liability company that owns the unit is a real estate developer and that the owner decided that it would be cheaper to pay daily license fees to the board than to incur the costs involved in negotiating a second alteration agreement for the second phase of the work. But the unit owner may not have been counting on being required to pay the board’s attorneys’ fees which may exceed $100,000. This may not be the last decision in this litigation as the owner may proceed to litigate its potentially valuable counterclaims.
THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF THE ONE LINCOLN SQUARE CONDOMINIUM, SUING ON BEHALF OF THE UNIT OWNERS, V. SAG 150 COLUMBUS LLC
WHAT HAPPENED A two-level penthouse unit was owned by a limited liability company at One Lincoln Square Condominium. In 2016 the LLC (SAG 150) signed a detailed 12-page alteration agreement for a major renovation of the apartment. The agreement provided that the work would be completed within 150 days, but if it went longer Lincoln Square Condo would be entitled to collect license fees of $100 per calendar day up to 30 days and $200 per day imposed thereafter.
The renovation, completed in June 2017, exceeded the time allotted by 251 days. The board sent the unit owner a notice showing the calculation of the license fees due, which was $47,200, plus interest, legal fees, and collection costs. These were added to the unit owner’s next common charge statement. The unit owner did not pay the outstanding balance, and after making repeated demands, the board sued the unit owner to collect.
IN COURT The unit owner responded and filed counterclaims against the condominium, alleging negligence and breach of contract. The owner claimed that leaks and water intrusion into the penthouse unit came from the roof and from façade work being performed on the building. At the same time, the board asked the court to rule in its favor on the breach of contract claim without a trial. The court granted the board’s request.
In its defense, the unit owner argued that the renovation was supposed to take place in two phases, with each phase governed by a separate alteration agreement. The court rejected this, explaining that the owner’s personal belief that the work would proceed in phases was not enough to create a factual dispute about the validity of the alteration agreement that had actually been signed.
The owner also argued that the board did not have the authority under the condominium’s bylaws to require an alteration agreement because the renovation was not structural work. The court noted that neither side had clearly demonstrated whether the work was structural or nonstructural, but concluded that this issue was ultimately irrelevant. What mattered was that the parties had entered into a valid alteration agreement and were bound by its terms. The court also found no legal support for the owner’s claim that the agreement was unenforceable simply because the owner believed it should not have been required to sign it or did not expect the board to enforce it.
The unit owner further argued that the board had failed to provide notice authorizing the start of construction. The court rejected this claim as well, pointing out that the alteration agreement placed the responsibility for notifying the board about the start of work on the unit owner.
Because there was no dispute that the renovation continued 251 days beyond the time allowed under the agreement, the court ruled that the board was entitled to recover the license fees owed. The court awarded the condominium $47,200 in license fees, along with interest and the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in collecting the unpaid charges.
COUNSEL for One Lincoln Square: ALAN B. BRILL, Alan B. Brill, P.C., ANDREW IAN BART, Kagan Lubic Lepper Finkelstein & Gold; for SAG 150: JOHN T. VANDERTUIN, DANIEL STEVEN GOLDSTEIN, CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL TUMULTY, Smith, Gambrell & Russell, CLAYTON DANIEL HARVEY, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath; Justice Paul A. Goetz
