Robinson Cole LLP
High Contrast Mode

Charles F. Martin, III is a nationally recognized, Chambers ranked, transactional commercial real estate attorney with approximately 25 years of experience guiding clients through complex, high-stakes real estate matters. Known for his pragmatic approach and ability to drive deals forward, Charles has built a national reputation as a trusted advisor to institutional investors, real estate developers, real estate funds, REITs, municipalities, and lenders across the country. Charles is frequently called upon to lead multidisciplinary teams on marquee transactions and serves as outside general counsel to several long-standing clients.

He serves on the firm’s Managing Committee, where he plays a key role in shaping strategic growth initiatives, including the expansion of the firm’s real estate footprint in South Florida and the New York Metro area.

Dealmaker Across Asset Classes + Geographies

Charles’s practice spans the full lifecycle of commercial real estate transactions, with recent work including:

  • Redevelopment of urban infill sites in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties, including mixed-use projects involving complex land use, environmental, and finance components.
  • Acquisition and disposition of office towers and retail centers in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Stamford, often involving multi-party negotiations, joint ventures, and tax structuring.
  • Representation of lenders and borrowers in securitized and balance sheet financings, including Freddie Mac and CMBS transactions, with active involvement in underwriting and diligence across both regions.
  • Leasing counsel for national landlords and tenants, including ground leases, retail rollouts, and industrial leases across North America, with a concentration of activity in New York City, Westchester County, NY, Fairfield County, CT and South Florida.

Practice Focus

Development
Charles advises developers, funds and municipalities on all aspects of commercial real estate development, including land use, environmental, construction, tax, and public finance.

Sales + Acquisitions
Charles represents buyers and sellers in high-value transactions across the U.S., including recent deals in New York City and South Florida, where he has helped clients navigate title, zoning, and regulatory complexities.

Financing Transactions
Charles is deeply experienced in real estate finance, representing both institutional lenders and borrowers. His work includes drafting and negotiating loan documents, managing diligence, and advising on securitization and syndication strategies.

Leasing
He counsels landlords and tenants in retail, office, restaurant, and industrial leasing. Recent matters include counsel-level leasing roles in NYC and advisory work for developers expanding into South Florida’s booming commercial corridors.

Leadership + Strategic Growth

Charles is instrumental in driving the firm’s growth strategy in South Florida, where he is helping to build a robust pipeline of work in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and West Palm Beach. His efforts are aligned with the region’s economic expansion and increasing demand for sophisticated legal counsel in real estate development, finance, and leasing.

He also maintains a strong presence in the New York Metro market, where he has led numerous transactions involving institutional clients, private equity sponsors, and public entities. His dual-market fluency allows him to seamlessly advise clients operating across both regions.

  • University of Connecticut School of Law (Juris Doctor)
  • Fairfield University (Bachelors, cum laude)
    • B.A., Economics

  • State of Connecticut
  • State of New York
  • State of Florida

Ranked in Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business in the State of Connecticut in the area of Real Estate for 2025, 2024 and 2023

Selected by his peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© in the area of Real Estate Law since 2023

Listed in the 2021 "300 Top Lawyers in Fairfield County" in the area of Real Estate published by Greenwich Magazine

Listed as a Rising Star in the New York Metro Super Lawyers® list from 2009 to 2016

Connecticut Law Tribune, recognized in 2013 New Leaders in the Law Yearbook

Fairfield County Business Journal, 2012 "40 Under 40" Inductee

NAIOP South Florida Chapter
Board Member

Fairfield County Commercial Brokers Network
Secretary (2008 - Present)

Fairfield County Bar Association
Board Member (2013 - 2017)

Urban Land Institute 
Treasurer and Executive Board Member (2010 - 2012)

New Covenant Center 
Former Advisory Council

Stamford Partnership
Former Board Member

Fairfield University
Former Board Member, Pre-Law Advisory Council

Experience


Foreign Sovereign Wealth Fund

Represent a foreign sovereign wealth fund with approximately $275 billion under management in United States real estate matters.

Represented Florida-Based Industrial Real Estate Operator

Represented a Florida owner/operator of small bay and light industrial properties in connection with a high-volume pipeline of acquisitions and dispositions throughout the state. The continued engagement has resulted in approximately a dozen transactions over a 12-month period, reflecting a sustained and trusted advisory role in the growth and evolution of a diverse industrial portfolio.

Read More

NASCAR Leasing Matters

Represent NASCAR in leasing matters across the country, including in New York, Los Angeles and Chicago.



Publications


February 14, 2024

‘Yellowstone’ Injunctions: Navigating the Wild West of Commercial Lease Disputes

New York Law Journal

The Yellowstone injunction is implicated in nearly every lease for commercial real property in the state of New York, yet most landlords and tenants do not know what it is or how it affects them. Below is a succinct overview of its implications so that commercial landlords and tenants can better navigate lease disputes. Stopping the Clock on a Cure Period Yellowstone injunctions take their name not from the popular neo-Western drama series but from the New York Court of Appeals case of First National Stores v. Yellowstone Shopping Center that created this limited-purpose injunction. In that case, the landlord and tenant disagreed about who was responsible for installing a sprinkler system, which the court ultimately decided was the tenant’s responsibility. Although the tenant was able and willing to make the installation once the court said so, the tenant had not asked to pause the cure period, and the landlord had terminated the lease for default. New York’s highest court decided it was not empowered to extend the tenant’s deadline to cure its default and upheld the lease termination. This case conceptualized and gave rise to the remedy referred to a Yellowstone injunction. Its purpose is to stop the running of the applicable cure period: it prevents a commercial landlord from prematurely terminating a lease for default until a court decides whether the alleged default is proper or not. Only a commercial tenant can ask for such an injunction, and it must demonstrate that: (1) it has received a notice of default, notice to cure, or a threat of termination; (2) it has made its request to the court for an injunction prior to the termination of the lease; and (3) it is willing and able to cure the alleged default. Since these three factors are relatively easy to prove, such injunctions are commonly granted. Although Yellowstone injunctions are a tenant’s remedy, they are not always one-sided and can provide protections for a landlord. New York courts have imposed conditions on injunctions meant to protect the landlord during the period of the stay. For example, in disputes concerning defaults unrelated to the payment of rent, courts have conditioned the injunction on the continued payment of rent or the posting of a bond. In disputes concerning the payment of rent, courts have required the tenant to deposit rent arrears in a jointly held escrow account and deposit monthly sums equal to rent in the account for the duration of the injunction. Practical Implications From a tenant’s perspective, time is often of the essence. Because most cure periods can be quite short (7 to 10 calendar days is typical), a tenant must act quickly if it receives a notice of default or notice of cure. This should involve having an attorney review the notice and the lease, assess whether an injunction remedy is available, and, if so, make an emergency application in court to stop the clock on the cure period. Acting quickly not only preserves the tenant’s right to cure its default down the road if the court decides against the tenant, but it also provides the tenant some leverage by engaging the landlord in urgent litigation. From a landlord’s perspective, these practical implications have led many landlords to require a tenant to waive its right to seek such an injunction. These waivers often go beyond Yellowstone injunctions to waive a tenant’s right to bring a lawsuit for a “declaratory judgment”—meaning a lawsuit brought in the Supreme Court of New York seeking an interpretation of the lease and giving the parties access to full discovery. As a result of such a waiver, tenants are typically limited to bringing their claims in an expedited, streamlined proceeding in the landlord-tenant part of the local court, which does not typically allow for discovery (and is, thus, less costly for the landlord). However, a wave of new laws arose in 2019 with respect to declaratory judgment waivers, making it prudent for landlords to take stock of their commercial leases well before a dispute arises. In 2019, the Court of Appeals upheld the enforceability of a lease provision waiving a commercial tenant’s right to bring an action for a declaratory judgment. In the case decided by the court, the Yellowstone injunction requested by the tenant as part of the action was also denied as waived. Almost immediately, in response to the Court of Appeals decision, the New York State Legislature passed a law prohibiting such declaratory judgment waivers effective Dec. 20, 2019. Section 235-h of the New York Real Property prohibits and nullifies any provision in a commercial lease “waiving or prohibiting the right of any tenant to bring a declaratory judgment action with respect to any provision, term or condition” of its commercial lease. Section 235-h raises more questions than it answers. First, Section 235-h has been interpreted to only apply to leases signed after Dec. 20, 2019. Therefore, waivers of declaratory judgment actions contained in older leases can still be enforceable. Second, the prohibition’s scope is unclear and has not yet been tested in court.  Section 235-h prohibits waiving the remedy of a “declaratory judgment action,” but a Yellowstone injunction can still be available to tenants in other types of actions as well. This creates opportunities and risks for both tenants and landlords. From a tenant’s perspective, a tenant whose lease only waives “declaratory judgment” actions can try to frame its lawsuit as one for breach of contract (i.e., a breach of the lease) and seek a Yellowstone injunction in that context. Although this type of action may not be ideal for the tenant, it is a potential workaround of the waiver that creates the same urgency and leverage that can promote an out-of-court resolution. From a landlord’s perspective, a landlord may still try to require a more limited waiver of only a Yellowstone injunction (not declaratory judgments broadly) because Section 235-h does not call out Yellowstone injunctions specifically. Tenants, in turn, may try to resist or negotiate such a waiver depending on their relative bargaining power. Negotiations could include lengthening the cure period in exchange for a waiver or requiring the parties to participate in a mediation before the lease can be terminated. Yellowstone injunctions and related waivers are frequently litigated, making it essential to stay updated on changes in the law. Janet Kljyan is a member of Robinson+Cole’s business litigation group and Charles F. Martin III is a partner in the firm’s real estate and development group. Reprinted with permission from the February 14, 2024 edition of the New York Law Journal© 2023 ALM Global Properties, LLC. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited, contact 877-256-2472 or asset-and-logo-licensing@alm.com

04/01/2010 and 08/20/2010

Issues for Corporate Office Tenants to Consider When Subleasing

CBIA News, Fairfield County Business Journal and republished in the New England Real Estate Journal
05/2007

Don't Try to Use Estoppel Certificate to Change Lease Terms

Commercial Property Management Insider
February 14, 2024

‘Yellowstone’ Injunctions: Navigating the Wild West of Commercial Lease Disputes

New York Law Journal

The Yellowstone injunction is implicated in nearly every lease for commercial real property in the state of New York, yet most landlords and tenants do not know what it is or how it affects them. Below is a succinct overview of its implications so that commercial landlords and tenants can better navigate lease disputes. Stopping the Clock on a Cure Period Yellowstone injunctions take their name not from the popular neo-Western drama series but from the New York Court of Appeals case of First National Stores v. Yellowstone Shopping Center that created this limited-purpose injunction. In that case, the landlord and tenant disagreed about who was responsible for installing a sprinkler system, which the court ultimately decided was the tenant’s responsibility. Although the tenant was able and willing to make the installation once the court said so, the tenant had not asked to pause the cure period, and the landlord had terminated the lease for default. New York’s highest court decided it was not empowered to extend the tenant’s deadline to cure its default and upheld the lease termination. This case conceptualized and gave rise to the remedy referred to a Yellowstone injunction. Its purpose is to stop the running of the applicable cure period: it prevents a commercial landlord from prematurely terminating a lease for default until a court decides whether the alleged default is proper or not. Only a commercial tenant can ask for such an injunction, and it must demonstrate that: (1) it has received a notice of default, notice to cure, or a threat of termination; (2) it has made its request to the court for an injunction prior to the termination of the lease; and (3) it is willing and able to cure the alleged default. Since these three factors are relatively easy to prove, such injunctions are commonly granted. Although Yellowstone injunctions are a tenant’s remedy, they are not always one-sided and can provide protections for a landlord. New York courts have imposed conditions on injunctions meant to protect the landlord during the period of the stay. For example, in disputes concerning defaults unrelated to the payment of rent, courts have conditioned the injunction on the continued payment of rent or the posting of a bond. In disputes concerning the payment of rent, courts have required the tenant to deposit rent arrears in a jointly held escrow account and deposit monthly sums equal to rent in the account for the duration of the injunction. Practical Implications From a tenant’s perspective, time is often of the essence. Because most cure periods can be quite short (7 to 10 calendar days is typical), a tenant must act quickly if it receives a notice of default or notice of cure. This should involve having an attorney review the notice and the lease, assess whether an injunction remedy is available, and, if so, make an emergency application in court to stop the clock on the cure period. Acting quickly not only preserves the tenant’s right to cure its default down the road if the court decides against the tenant, but it also provides the tenant some leverage by engaging the landlord in urgent litigation. From a landlord’s perspective, these practical implications have led many landlords to require a tenant to waive its right to seek such an injunction. These waivers often go beyond Yellowstone injunctions to waive a tenant’s right to bring a lawsuit for a “declaratory judgment”—meaning a lawsuit brought in the Supreme Court of New York seeking an interpretation of the lease and giving the parties access to full discovery. As a result of such a waiver, tenants are typically limited to bringing their claims in an expedited, streamlined proceeding in the landlord-tenant part of the local court, which does not typically allow for discovery (and is, thus, less costly for the landlord). However, a wave of new laws arose in 2019 with respect to declaratory judgment waivers, making it prudent for landlords to take stock of their commercial leases well before a dispute arises. In 2019, the Court of Appeals upheld the enforceability of a lease provision waiving a commercial tenant’s right to bring an action for a declaratory judgment. In the case decided by the court, the Yellowstone injunction requested by the tenant as part of the action was also denied as waived. Almost immediately, in response to the Court of Appeals decision, the New York State Legislature passed a law prohibiting such declaratory judgment waivers effective Dec. 20, 2019. Section 235-h of the New York Real Property prohibits and nullifies any provision in a commercial lease “waiving or prohibiting the right of any tenant to bring a declaratory judgment action with respect to any provision, term or condition” of its commercial lease. Section 235-h raises more questions than it answers. First, Section 235-h has been interpreted to only apply to leases signed after Dec. 20, 2019. Therefore, waivers of declaratory judgment actions contained in older leases can still be enforceable. Second, the prohibition’s scope is unclear and has not yet been tested in court.  Section 235-h prohibits waiving the remedy of a “declaratory judgment action,” but a Yellowstone injunction can still be available to tenants in other types of actions as well. This creates opportunities and risks for both tenants and landlords. From a tenant’s perspective, a tenant whose lease only waives “declaratory judgment” actions can try to frame its lawsuit as one for breach of contract (i.e., a breach of the lease) and seek a Yellowstone injunction in that context. Although this type of action may not be ideal for the tenant, it is a potential workaround of the waiver that creates the same urgency and leverage that can promote an out-of-court resolution. From a landlord’s perspective, a landlord may still try to require a more limited waiver of only a Yellowstone injunction (not declaratory judgments broadly) because Section 235-h does not call out Yellowstone injunctions specifically. Tenants, in turn, may try to resist or negotiate such a waiver depending on their relative bargaining power. Negotiations could include lengthening the cure period in exchange for a waiver or requiring the parties to participate in a mediation before the lease can be terminated. Yellowstone injunctions and related waivers are frequently litigated, making it essential to stay updated on changes in the law. Janet Kljyan is a member of Robinson+Cole’s business litigation group and Charles F. Martin III is a partner in the firm’s real estate and development group. Reprinted with permission from the February 14, 2024 edition of the New York Law Journal© 2023 ALM Global Properties, LLC. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited, contact 877-256-2472 or asset-and-logo-licensing@alm.com

04/01/2010 and 08/20/2010

Issues for Corporate Office Tenants to Consider When Subleasing

CBIA News, Fairfield County Business Journal and republished in the New England Real Estate Journal
05/2007

Don't Try to Use Estoppel Certificate to Change Lease Terms

Commercial Property Management Insider
3/2007

Include Five Critical Operating Expense Protections in Your Lease

Commercial Tenant's Lease Insider


3/2007

Include Five Critical Operating Expense Protections in Your Lease

Commercial Tenant's Lease Insider

Events


Past

Demystifying Lease Provisions

Mar 20 2010
CCIM Conference
Past

Subleases: 10 Things to Consider

Jun 26 2009
Fairfield County Commercial Brokers Network
Past

Demystifying Lease Provisions

Mar 20 2010
CCIM Conference
Past

Subleases: 10 Things to Consider

Jun 26 2009
Fairfield County Commercial Brokers Network
Past

Deal Savers (Various Techniques That Can Be Applied to Real Estate Deals to Enhance or Save Your Transaction)

9/2007
CCIM Conference
Past

Deal Savers (Various Techniques That Can Be Applied to Real Estate Deals to Enhance or Save Your Transaction)

9/2007
CCIM Conference

News


April 10, 2026

Chuck Martin Elected to the NAIOP South Florida Chapter’s Board of Directors

Real Estate + Development group partner Charles Martin was recently elected to serve on the NAIOP South Florida Chapter’s Board of Directors. NAIOP South Florida is the premier commercial real estate development organization in the South Florida region, supporting commercial real estate professionals with advocacy, education, and business opportunities through business connections, educational programs, and legislative efforts.

NAIOP South Florida Chapter
August 26, 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026

Firm receives top listing in Connecticut lawyer count in national peer review survey
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026 teaser
June 5, 2025

Robinson+Cole Secures 45 Total Rankings in Chambers USA 2025 Guide

Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business
Robinson+Cole Secures 45 Total Rankings in <i>Chambers USA 2025</i> Guide teaser
April 10, 2026

Chuck Martin Elected to the NAIOP South Florida Chapter’s Board of Directors

Real Estate + Development group partner Charles Martin was recently elected to serve on the NAIOP South Florida Chapter’s Board of Directors. NAIOP South Florida is the premier commercial real estate development organization in the South Florida region, supporting commercial real estate professionals with advocacy, education, and business opportunities through business connections, educational programs, and legislative efforts.

NAIOP South Florida Chapter
August 26, 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026

Firm receives top listing in Connecticut lawyer count in national peer review survey
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026 teaser
June 5, 2025

Robinson+Cole Secures 45 Total Rankings in Chambers USA 2025 Guide

Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business
Robinson+Cole Secures 45 Total Rankings in <i>Chambers USA 2025</i> Guide teaser
August 15, 2024

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in <i>The Best Lawyers in America</i>© 2025 teaser
June 6, 2024

2024 Chambers USA Recognizes 24 Robinson+Cole Lawyers in Nine Practice Areas

Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business
2024 <i>Chambers USA</i> Recognizes 24 Robinson+Cole Lawyers in Nine Practice Areas teaser
February 21, 2024

Janet Kljyan and Charles Martin Author New York Law Journal Article on Yellowstone Injunctions and Commercial Lease Disputes

New York Law Journal
August 17, 2023

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2024

Best Lawyers in America
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2024 teaser
June 1, 2023

2023 Chambers USA Recognizes 22 Robinson+Cole Lawyers in Eight Practice Areas

2023 <i>Chambers USA</i> Recognizes 22 Robinson+Cole Lawyers in Eight Practice Areas teaser
August 18, 2022

74 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America 2023

The Best Lawyers in America

August 15, 2024

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in <i>The Best Lawyers in America</i>© 2025 teaser
June 6, 2024

2024 Chambers USA Recognizes 24 Robinson+Cole Lawyers in Nine Practice Areas

Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business
2024 <i>Chambers USA</i> Recognizes 24 Robinson+Cole Lawyers in Nine Practice Areas teaser
February 21, 2024

Janet Kljyan and Charles Martin Author New York Law Journal Article on Yellowstone Injunctions and Commercial Lease Disputes

New York Law Journal
August 17, 2023

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2024

Best Lawyers in America
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2024 teaser
June 1, 2023

2023 Chambers USA Recognizes 22 Robinson+Cole Lawyers in Eight Practice Areas

2023 <i>Chambers USA</i> Recognizes 22 Robinson+Cole Lawyers in Eight Practice Areas teaser
August 18, 2022

74 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America 2023

The Best Lawyers in America