Tan en Baum

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK

GRAZIANO D. GIGLIO AND ANA B. GIGLIO, X .....................................................................

Index No. :

Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs designate: NEW YORK COUNTY as the place of trial

The basis of the venue designated is: Plaintiffs Residence

SUMMONS

X Plaintiffs' residence address:

-against-

NOUVEAU SOLUTIONS7 INC., NICHOLAS DIFRISCO AND PAWEL PIETRUCK, O S l l l % t ; ! N

Defendants. ......................................................................

400 East 56th Street, Apt 39D New York, New York

To the above named defendant(s)

YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this summons to serve a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiffs Attorney(s) within 20 days after the service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint.

Dated: Great Neck, New York September 9,2008

LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL M. TANENBAUM Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 1 Great Neck Road, Suite 308 Great Neck, New York 1 102 1 (5 16) 829-4620

Defendants' Addresses: Nouveau Solutions, Inc. 445 East 77'h Street New York, New York 10021 A

Nicholas DiFrisco c/o Nouveau Solutions, Inc. 445 East 77Ih Street New York, New York 10021

Pawel Pietruck c/o Nouveau Solutions, Inc. 445 East 77'h Street New York, New York 10021

Supreme Court Records OnLine Library - page 1 of 6

Plaintiffs,

-against-

NOUVEAU SOLUTIONS, INC., NICHOLAS DIFRISCO AND PAWEL PIETRUCK,

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

Index No. :

Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, The LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL M. TANENBAUM,

complaining of the Defendants respectfully allege the following, upon information and belief

1.

2.

3.

4.

5 .

6.

7.

At all times hereinafter mentioned, Plaintiffs, Graziano D. Giglio and Ana B. Giglio were and still are

residents of the County of New York, State of New York.

Upon information and belief and at all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant, Nouveau Solutions, Inc.

(hereinafter referred to as “NOUVEAU”) was and is a corporation existing by the virtue of the laws of the

State of New York with a last known address of 445 East 77” Street, New York, New York 10021.

Upon information and belief and at all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant, NICHOLAS DIFRISCO

(hereinafter referred to as “DIFRISCO”) was and still is an officer and shareholder of Defendant

NOUVEAU.

Upon information and belief and at all times hereinafter mentioned, Defendant, PAWEL PIETRU

(hereinafter referred to as “PIETRUCK”) was and still is an officer and

NOUVEAU.

Upon information and belief and at all times hereinafter mentioned, De

PIETRUCK were and still are residents of the County of New York, State of

That on or about November 13,2006, Plaintiffs as “Owner” entered into a wri

NOWEAU, for flooring and associated work at their cooperative apartment located at 400 @‘89Sf 56Ih Street,

Apt 39D, New York, New York (the “Premises”). A copy of the contract is annexed hereto as Exhibit “A”.

Pursuant to Option A of the contract, dated November 13,2006, NOWEAU agreed to provide flooring

and work associated therewith, for the sum of $25,836.60.


8. The individual Defendants, DIFRISCO and PIETRUCK, who own and control the Defendant corporation

and have used said corporation as their alter ego throughout their dealings with the Plaintiffs.

AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

9. Plaintiffs repeat, reiterate, and reallege each and every allegation contained in the paragraphs marked and

designated “1” through “8” of this Verified Complaint with the same force and effect as if more fully set

forth at length herein.

Defendants have failed, neglected and refused to perform their obligations under the November 13,2006 10.

contract.

The various errors, omissions and defects in the construction of the home that the aforementioned 1 1.

defendants have failed, neglected and refused to remedy include, among other things:

a. b. Cracked boards. C. Ill-fitting saddles. d. e.

Cupping of the boards and warped appearance.

Water spots in the polyurethane. Scratches and scuffs in the wood.

12. By reason of the Defendants’ neglect and refusal to honor its obligations under the November 13,2006

contract by fully completing the work and in a competent and professional manner, the Plaintiffs have been

and will continue to expend monies to completely redo the flooring and the work associated therewith in the

premises, and be compelled to move out of the premises while said work is being done.

By reason of the foregoing, the Plaintiffs have been damaged in the sum anticipated to be not less than 13.

$150,000.00, the exact amount to be proven at trial.

AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

14. Plaintiffs repeat, reiterate, and reallege each and every allegation contained in the paragraphs marked and

designated “1” through “13” of this Verified Complaint with the same force and effect as if more fully set

forth at length herein.

15. The Defendants’ entered upon performance of the contract in a careless, negligent and improper manner

and carelessly and negligently selected inferior, unsuitable and defective materials and performed said

services in such a careless, negligent and unworkmanlike manner that the Plaintiffs were required to and

did, in fact, expend and will be required to expend large sums of money in having the work that was to be

performed by the defendants repaired, corrected andor replaced.


16. The Plaintiffs have duly performed all the terms and conditions on their part to be performed under the

contract.

17. By reason of the foregoing, the Plaintiffs have been damaged in the sum anticipated to be not less than

$150,000.00, the exact amount to be proven at trial.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs’ demand judgment against the Defendants on the first and second causes of

action in the amount of not less than $150,000.00, the exact amount to be proven at trial, together with costs and

disbursements herein, and such other, fiuther and different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper.


Yours, etc.,

LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL M. TANENBAUM Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 1 Great Neck Rd., Suite 308 Great Neck, New York 11021 (516) 829-4620


VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF NASSAU : SA:

The undersigned, an attorney duly admitted to practice law in the State of New York, under penalties of perjury, does hereby affirm:

That I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiffs in the within matter and make this affirmation in accordance with CPLR 3020. I have read the within SUMMONS AND VERIFIED COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof to be true to your affirmant's own knowledge, with the exception of those matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and, as to those matters, your affirmant believes them to be true. The grounds upon which your affirmant bases his belief regarding those matters not stated upon knowledge are: information in the file and conferences with the plaintiff.

This verification is made by your affirmant and not by Plaintiffs for the following reason: affirmant maintains his office for the practice of law outside the county from where Plaintiffs reside.


DANIEL M. TANENBAUM


c.

w

s I x

m

3 2, CD

0 2.

I

I !


Documents

Tan en Baum