Disputes in Real Estate Transactions: Legal Strategies That Work 

By: Peter S. Sanders – Real Estate Litigation

Real estate deals often appear straightforward: purchase agreements, financing, title search, and closing. Yet when disputes emerge, they can derail even the most carefully planned transaction.  

At CBM&S, as distinguished New York real estate attorneys, we recognize that litigation risk is a primary concern in every contract. In this article, we provide a no-nonsense guide to the legal strategies that succeed, drawing on our hands-on experience, local laws, and a commitment to achieving outcomes. 

The Stakes in Real Estate Disputes 

Disputes cost more than money. They delay closings, sour relationships, expose you to counterclaims, and often damage your reputation and credit. In New York’s dense and highly regulated property market, disputes over title, boundaries, zoning, contract performance, or construction defects can become protracted, high-stakes battles. 

Because CBM&S operates offices in New York City, Long Island, and Florida, we are well-versed in the local legal climate and procedural tools available in New York courts.  

The central question is not simply “Can I sue?” but rather “How do I prevail efficiently, maintain leverage, and control exposure?” Below, we distill our experience into concrete approaches. 

Common Types of Real Estate Disputes in New York 

Understanding the dispute type shapes strategy. Some of the most frequent categories include: 

• Title and ownership disputes — competing claims, liens, or clouded title. 

• Boundary or easement conflicts — misaligned surveys or adverse possession claims. 

• Contract and purchase agreement breaches — failures to deliver, misrepresentations, or deposit forfeitures. 

• Construction and development defects — design defects, delays, cost overruns. 

• Zoning, land-use, and regulatory challenges — violations or inability to secure approvals. 

• Financing default or foreclosure proceedings — lender remedies, guarantor claims. 

• Landlord-tenant and lease disputes in connection with mixed-use or investment properties. 

Each dispute demands a calibrated legal approach. We do not rely on boilerplate tactics: our strategies are fine-tuned to the facts, risk posture, and forum. 

Strategy 1: Early Case Assessment and Risk Profiling 

From our first consultation, we conduct a rigorous risk assessment. That includes: 

1. Document Audit: We review all contracts, title reports, correspondence, maps, permits, and financing documents to ensure accuracy and completeness. In New York, even small typographical errors or choice-of-law clauses can have significant consequences.

2. Issue Spotting & Strengths/Weaknesses Matrix: We map out defenses, counterclaims, statutes of limitation, jurisdictional issues, and exposure parameters. This matrix gives you clarity on whether full litigation is warranted or whether a settlement is preferable at any given time throughout the fluid and dynamic process towards resolution.

3. Cost / Time Projection: We benchmark potential durations and costs based on the unique fact pattern and remedies available, the identity and reputation of the adversary and their attorney, historical m.o., the strength of our position and ability to demonstrate it in a compelling way ant the outset, and the relevant forum (e.g., Commercial Division or other parts of the NYS Supreme Court,  Commercial Landlord-Tenant Part of the Civil or District Courts, arbitration, mediation). In New York, procedural rules such as CPLR 3212 may allow summary judgment on motion papers alone instead of the need for trial, or CPLR 3213 which allows a party to obtain a quick summary judgment in lieu of complaint in money-only cases, without any discovery or depositions, a tool often used by lenders or against guarantors.  

This disciplined, comprehensive and proactive front-end approach can significantly reduce the time and expense involved with open-ended litigation. It also generates leverage: when the other side knows we have already “seen the battlefield,” they are likelier to engage seriously. 

Strategy 2: Contractual Drafting & Built-in Dispute Architecture 

Many disputes can be prevented or softened with clever drafting: 

• Mandatory ADR clauses (mediation, arbitration) are inserted into purchase contracts, lease agreements, or guaranties. 

• Escalation and dispute resolution tiers — first, demand; then, mediation; then, binding arbitration or litigation. 

• Choice-of-law and forum clauses — specifying New York law and New York courts, to lock in favorable procedural tools, specialized courts designed to streamline high value or sophisticated business and contractual disputes, and to offer predictability. 

• Liquidated damages and cap on liability provisions to limit exposure. 

• Clear representations, warranties, and due diligence carveouts to manage expectations and disclosures. 

At CBM&S, we are involved in drafting and negotiating real estate documents and contracts from the start. We routinely advises clients on development, disposition, and statutory approval processes.  

With foresight, we incorporate strategic dispute mechanisms before a fight even begins. 

Strategy 3: Negotiation, Mediation, And Early Settlement 

Litigation is best used as a tool, not a default. Most disputes are better resolved outside the courthouse, if possible. We steer clients to: 

• Demand letters with calibrated pressure points, backed by a well-documented “reserve case” that demonstrates our ability to litigate. 

• Mediation with a neutral facilitator, often successful when both parties fear costs and uncertainty. 

• Structured settlements or phased remedies (e.g., corrective work plus escrow) so the deal can move forward even while disputes wind down. 

Even in New York’s tough real estate environment, creative settlement terms, backed by a credible threat of litigation, often yield superior outcomes. We never abandon trial readiness even in a settlement posture; that balance gives our clients confidence and leverage. 

Strategy 4: Selective Motion Practice And Procedural Weaponry 

If a dispute necessitates motion practice or litigation, we deploy procedural tools aggressively: 

• CPLR 3213 motions to obtain summary judgment in lieu of complaint, where the claim is strictly for payment of money. This can yield a judgment in months rather than years. 

• Motions to dismiss or strike, especially for defective pleadings, statute of limitations, or jurisdictional infirmities. 

• CPLR 3212 motions for summary judgment, once discovery is closed, to test the merits. 

• Preliminary injunctions or TROs in cases of irreparable harm (e.g., threatened demolition, trespass). 

• Discovery strategy — deploying targeted document demands, expert reports, and depositions to lock in facts before opponents shift narratives. 

We tailor motion campaigns to where the law is favorable and where courts in New York have recognized precedent. The Commercial Division, in particular, often favors parties that effectively clear procedural hurdles. 

Strategy 5: Expert Use, Forensics, And Technical Insight 

Many real estate disputes hinge on technical issues, including engineering, environmental contamination, architectural design, geotechnical surveys, and zoning code interpretation. We partner early with: 

• Qualified experts to prepare reports, rebut opposing experts, and testify credibly. 

• Forensic title specialists or title insurers to resolve chain-of-title anomalies. 

• Surveyors and GIS specialists to validate boundary claims or easement claims. 

• Environmental consultants are called when contamination or liability issues arise. 

By integrating technical rigor into legal strategy, our positions withstand challenge in court or arbitration. Opponents who confront a well-documented file frequently recalibrate their stance once confronted with thorough expert backing. 

Strategy 6: Trial Readiness and Controlled Escalation 

Even when litigation is inevitable, we manage escalation: 

• Phased risk thresholds — incremental spending caps and milestone reviews (e.g., after fact discovery, after expert reports). 

• Mock courtroom rehearsals and focus groups for key witnesses or exhibits. 

• Settlement anchoring early — even post‐pleading, we continue to negotiate, using discovery revelations as leverage. 

• Jury or bench trial preparation, with streamlined exhibits, demonstratives, and narrative control. 

Because CBM&S maintains both litigation and transactional practice, we cross-pollinate best practices: our real estate deals always carry a litigation awareness; our lawsuits always seek business outcomes. 

Case Study Highlight (Anonymized, New York Context) 

Suppose a purchaser contracts to buy a development site. After closing, undisclosed zoning violations emerge, threatening the project. The buyer demands rescission. The seller counters that the buyer’s engineering due diligence should have caught the defect and sues for deposit forfeiture. 

At intake, we audit all documents and expert reports. We issue a demand with a reserve litigation threat. We attempt mediation while preparing a Complaint. We may also retain urban zoning counsel and/or an engineer to draft a two-pronged motion: one to dismiss seller’s forfeiture claim, the other to seek rescission or damages if necessary. 

We continue settlement discussions through expert exchange. In the end, we achieve a negotiated settlement: the seller refunds part of the deposit, the buyer proceeds under a corrective amendment with a holdback escrow, and both parties avoid months of discovery and trial. 

This kind of layered strategy is typical of how a New York real estate attorney must operate, with both transaction structuring discipline and litigation agility. 

Key Takeaways to Put into Practice 

• Start dispute awareness early — even before contracts are signed, and anticipate potential risks. 

• Embed dispute resolution architecture into documents — ADR, caps, choice of law. 

• Conduct rigorous early case assessment — map out strengths, weaknesses, and exposure. 

• Use settlement and mediation aggressively — litigation should be a last resort. 

• Leverage New York procedural tools — where possible. 

• Invest in technical experts early — disputes often turn on expert analysis. 

• Stay trial-ready even during settlement postures, balancing pressure and flexibility. 

At CBM&S, we combine in-depth knowledge as real estate lawyers in New York with litigation expertise to deliver results. We are not passive advisors. We are stewards of your risk, advocates for your value, and strategists in a competitive legal arena. 

If you face or anticipate a real estate dispute in New York, check us out further and use the Contact Us page. We will assess your position, propose a path forward, and execute the legal strategy that best suits your needs.