Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
——————————————————————X Index No.:
FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY
a/s/o 25 Park Row Condominium and other interested
insureds under the relevant policy of insurance
New York County as the
place of Trial
-against-
Basis of Venue is:
Loss Location
RAEL MAINTENANCE CORP., RAEL AUTOMATIC
SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC., G. A. FLEET
ASSOCIATES, INC. G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC,
URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC, BURO HAPPOLD
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C., BURO HAPPOLD, INC.,
COOKFOX ARCHITECTS, D.P.C, PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC.,
And RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC
Defendant
——————————————————————X
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 Plaintiff’s attorney within twenty days after the service of this summons,
exclusive of the day of service, where service is made by delivery upon you personally within
the state, or, within 30 days after completion of service where service is made in any other
manner. 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: Huntington, New York
June 11, 2024
Respectfully submitted,
SHEPS LAW GROUP P.C.
BY: ROBERT C. SHEPS
Attorney for Plaintiff
25 High Street
Huntington, New York 11743
(631) 249-5600
Our File No.: 8234
1 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
TO:
Rael Maintenance Corp.
via Secretary of State
Albany, New York
Rael Automatic Sprinkler Company, Inc.
via Secretary of State
Albany, New York
G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, INC.
via Secretary of State
Albany, New York
G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC
via Secretary of State
Albany, New York
Attelier Group, LLC
via Secretary of State Albany, New York
Buro Happold Consulting Engineers, P.C.
via Secretary of State
Albany, New York
Buro Happold,Inc.
via Secretary of State
Albany, New York
Cookfox Architects,
D.P.C. via Secretary of
State Albany, New York
Parkview Plumbing & Heating,
Inc. via Secretary of State
Albany, New York
RCI Fire Protection
LLC via Secretary of
State Albany, New
York
2 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
——————————————————————X Index No.:
FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY
a/s/o 25 Park Row Condominium and other interested
insureds under the relevant policy of insurance
JURY TRIAL
DEMANDED
-against-
RAEL MAINTENANCE CORP., RAEL AUTOMATIC
SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC., G. A. FLEET
ASSOCIATES, INC. G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC,
URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC, BURO HAPPOLD
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C., BURO HAPPOLD, INC.,
COOKFOX ARCHITECTS, D.P.C, PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC.,
And RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC
——————————————————————X
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/25 Park Row Condominium
and other interested insureds under the relevant policy of insurance by and through its attorneys
SHEPS LAW GROUP, P.C. complaining of the defendants RAEL MAINTENANCE CORP.,
RAEL AUTOMATIC, SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC., G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, INC.,
G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC, URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC, BURO HAPPOLD
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C., BURO HAPPOLD, INC., COOKFOX ARCHITECTS,
D.P.C, PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC., and RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC alleges
upon information and belief that at all times hereinafter mentioned:
The Parties
1. Plaintiff, FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY was and is a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, having its principal place of
3 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
business located at 777 San Marin Drive, Novato, California 94998, and was at all times material
hereto, authorized to issue policies of insurance in the State of New York.
2. At all times pertinent hereto, plaintiff provided coverage to its insured, 25 Park Row
Condominium (hereinafter “INSURED”), under a policy of insurance number NYP2007753-
20/NYX9007753-20 for the real and business property they owned and/or occupied at 25 Park
Row, New York, NY 10038 ("hereinafter “THE PREMISES”).
3. At all relevant times, upon information and belief 25 Park Row Condominium (“25 Park
Row”) was and still is a condominium association governed and/or operated by its Board of
Managers, existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York with a principal place
of business located at 25 Park Row, New York, NY 10038 (the “Building”).
4. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Rael Maintenance Corp., was and is a
domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York,
with a principal place of business located at 1750 Plaza Avenue, New Hyde Park, NY 11040.
5. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Rael Automatic Sprinkler Company, Inc.
was and still is a domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the
State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 1750 Plaza Avenue, New Hyde
Park, NY 11040.
6. Rael Maintenance Corp. and Rael Automatic Sprinkler Company, Inc., at all relevant times,
and upon information and belief, were entities associated with and/or related to one another, and/or
operated in concert with each other, and conducted their business under the company name of Rael
Fire Protection Company are collectively referred to as “Rael.”
4 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
7. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021 Rael was in the
business of providing fire protection services and installed, inspected, maintained, and/or tested the
fire protection system located at the Building.
8. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, INC., was
and still is a domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State
of New York, with a principal place of business located at 15 Indian Avenue, Mahopac, NY 10541.
9. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC., was
and still is a domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State
of New York, with a principal place of business located at 6 International Drive, Rye Brook, NY
10573.
10. G.A. Fleet Associates, Inc. and G.A. Fleet Associates, LLC at all relevant times, and upon
information and belief, were entities associated with and/or related to one another, and/or operated
in concert with each other, and conducted their business under the company name of Fleet
collectively referred to as “Fleet.”
11. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021 Fleet was in the
business of providing fire protection pumping systems and installed, inspected, maintained, and/or
tested the fire protection pumps located at the Building.
12. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Urban Atelier Group, LLC (“UAG”)
was and still is a foreign limited liability company, organized and existing under the laws of the
State of Delaware, with a principal place of business located at 85 Fifth Avenue, 12th Floor, New
York, NY 10003.
13. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, UAG was and still is engaged in general
construction services, including project development, construction management, project
5 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
management, including performing these services relating to the fire suppression system at the
Building, including its drainage system.
14. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Buro Happold Consulting Engineers,
P.C. (“BHCE”), was and still is a domestic professional service corporation, duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 100
Broadway, 17th Floor, New York, NY 10005.
15. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021, BHCE was in
the business of engineering, design, construction management and/or supervision, and it
engineered, designed and/or oversaw the construction, installation, maintenance, and/or testing of
the fire protection system located at the Building, including its drainage system.
16. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Buro Happold, Inc. was and is a
domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New
York, with a principal place of business located at 100 Broadway, 23rd Floor, New York, NY 10005.
17. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021, Buro Happold
was in the business of engineering, design, construction management and/or supervision, and it
engineered, designed and/or oversaw the construction, installation, maintenance, and/or testing of
the fire protection system located at the Building, including its drainage system.
18. BHCE and Buro Happold, Inc. at all relevant times, and upon information and belief, were
entities associated with and/or related to one another, and/or operated in concert with each other.
BHCE and Buro Happold will be collectively referred to as “Buro Happold.”
19. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Cookfox Architects, D.P.C.
(“Cookfox”), was and still is a domestic professional service corporation, duly organized and
6 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 250
West 57th Street, 17th Floor, New York, NY 10107.
20. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021, Cookfox was
in the business of architectural services, including the overseeing of construction, labor and/or
services, and was the architect for the Building, including its fire protection system and including
its drainage system.
21. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Parkview Plumbing & Heating, Inc.
(“Parkview”) was and is a domestic business corporation duly organized and existing under the laws
of the State of New York having a place of business located at 2210 Reeds Mill Lane, Bronx, New
York 10475.
22. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021, Parkview was
in the business of providing plumbing and heating services and installed, inspected, maintained,
and/or tested the fire protection system at the Building, including its associated drainage system
and pump system.
23. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, RCI Fire Protection LLC (“RCI”) was
and is a domestic limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the State
of New York having a place of business located at 294 Garretson Avenue, Staten Island, New York
10305.
24. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, RCI was in the business of providing fire
protection services and installed, inspected, maintained, and/or tested the fire protection system
located at the Building, including its associated drainage system and pump system.
7 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
25. Prior to October 7, 2021 Fleet installed fire protection pump systems throughout the
building including on the 48th floor.
26. Prior to October 7, 2021 Rael was conducting an inspection and/or testing of the fire
protection system at the Building (the “Work”) when it caused a massive water overflow event
by triggering the fire sprinkler system pump on the 48th floor to activate resulting in extreme
flooding and severe property damage throughout the Building (“Loss”).
27. As a result of the water overflow, the drainage system at the Building was unable to
properly and efficiently handle and drain the water. As a result, drainage was insufficient and/or
delayed, which caused water to pool, and exacerbate the Loss by escaping from the mechanical
room.
28. At all relevant times, Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company insured 25 Park Row
Condominium for certain property and other damage under policy number NYP2007753-
20/NYX9007753-20 (“Policy”).
29. As a result of the Loss, 25 Park Row Condominium submitted an insurance claim to
Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company whereby Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company adjusted
and paid the claim and became subrogated to the claims of 25 Park Row Condominium,
pursuant to the Policy, equity, and applicable law in an amount in excess of $300,000.
8 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST RAEL
MAINTENANCE CORP. and
RAEL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY
NEGLIGENCE
30. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the
previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth
herein.
31. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s
Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross
negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their
agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in:
a. Failing to properly inspect, service and assess the fire pumps at the premises
prior to the incident.
b. Failing to educate itself about the operation of the fire suppression system,
including understanding the location and the operation of the tanks, associated
pumps and drainage;
c. Failing to make appropriate inquiry to building personnel to educate itself about
the operation of the fire suppression system, including the associated pumps and
drainage;
d. Failing to ensure it understood the operation of the associated pumps and piping
for the fire suppression system before commencing its Work;
e. Failing to properly maintain, operate and/or test the fire protection system;
f. Failing to take appropriate steps to prepare for the Work, including
understanding the operation of the associated pumps and piping for the fire
suppression system;
g. Failing to hire, train and supervise its employees, agents and/or subcontractors;
h. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendants knew, or should have known,
would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building because it failed to
understand the fire suppression system’s operation and drainage;
i. Failing to conduct the maintenance, operation and/or testing of the fire
suppression system in a safe, proper, secure manner, thereby creating an
unreasonable risk of harm to the property of Plaintiff’s insureds, which
Defendants knew or should have known created an unreasonable risk of harm to
the subject premises;
j. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations
9 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
ordinances and/or industry customs related to the Work; and
k. Failing to act reasonably under the circumstances.
32. As a result of Rael’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of
$300,000.00 for which Rael is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against RAEL
MAINTENANCE CORP. and RAEL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC in an
amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,
attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
AGAINST FLEET
NEGLIGENCE
33. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the
previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth
herein.
34. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s
Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross
negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their
agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in:
a. failing to adequately, properly and safely design, assemble, inspect, install, maintain
and test the subject fire pumps and related components at the building;
b. failing to adequately and properly warn plaintiff’s insured of any maintenance
requirements to keep the fire pumps in working order prior to the occurrence so as to
avoid an unintended discharge of water;
c. failing and omitting to do and perform those things necessary to avoid an
unreasonable risk of harm to Plaintiff’s Insureds property as to render the operation of
the subject fire pumps and related components safe and proper;
d. failing to properly design, monitor, manufacture and inspect the subject fire pump and
related components to avoid an unreasonable risk of water damage;
10 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
e. failing to properly design, manufacture install, and inspect the valves utilized by the
subject fire pumps and related components to avoid an unreasonable risk of water
damage;
f. failing to safeguard the premises to avoid causing water damage to the Building
including but not limited to poor drainage and water proofing of the structure;
g. failing to provide adequate instruction and/or warning with respect to the proper
operation, maintenance, and care of the fire pumps and related components;
h. failing to recognize the obvious hazard presented by the improper installation,
inspection and maintenance of the subject fire pumps and related components;
i. failing to install the subject fire pumps and alarm system in a safe manner as to avoid
a dangerous condition;
j. failing to properly and adequately instruct its servants, contractors, employees and/or
workmen as to the safe and proper installation of the subject fire pumps and related
valves in the building;
k. retaining incompetent, unlicensed employees, agents, servants, workers,
subcontractors, without the requisite skills and abilities to install the subject fire
pumps and related components in the building;
l. failing to properly install, monitor, test and manage the BMS system which could
have warned of system wide failures, and
m. otherwise failing to use due care and proper skill under the circumstances.
35. As a result of Fleets negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of
$300,000.00 for which Fleet is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against FLEET in an
amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,
attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
AGAINST URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC,
NEGLIGENCE
36. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the
previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth
at length herein.
37. At all relevant times, UAG had a duty to act with reasonable care, which included
11 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
designing, engineering, supervising the construction of the sprinkler maintenance system,
including its drainage, at the Building.
38. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s
Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross
negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their
agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in:
a. Failing to properly oversee the construction of the Building, including the fire
suppression system and its associated drainage and piping system;
b. Failing to adequately and properly design the fire suppression system, including
its drainage system and associated piping at the Building;
c. Failing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents,
subcontractors, employees and representatives to design, test and install the fire
suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the
Building;
d. Creating a dangerous condition which defendant knew or should have known
would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building;
e. Failing to properly and adequately test the fire suppression system, including its
drainage system and associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of
harm to the Building;
f. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in
order to render the Building safe;
g. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations,
ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or relating to
the Building;
h. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances.
39. As a result of UAG’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in the amount in an
amount in excess of $300,000.00, for which UAG is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against URBAN
ATELIER GROUP, LLC in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment
and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this
Court deems just and proper.
12 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
AGAINST BURO HAPPOLD CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C.
and BURO HAPPOLD, INC.
NEGLIGENCE
40. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in
the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set
forth at length herein.
41. At all relevant times, Buro Happold had a duty to act with reasonable care,
which included designing, engineering, supervising the construction of the sprinkler
maintenance system, including its drainage, at the Building.
42. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s
Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross
negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their
agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in:
a. Failing to adequately and properly design the fire suppression system, including
its drainage system and associated piping at the Building;
b. Failing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents,
subcontractors, employees and representatives to design and install the fire
suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the
Building;
c. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendant knew or should have known
would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building;
d. Failing to properly and adequately test the fire suppression system, including its
drainage system and associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of
harm to the Building;
e. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in
order to render the Building safe;
f. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations,
ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or relating to
the Building; and
g. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances.
13 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
43. As a result of Buro Happold’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in
excess of $300,000.00 for which Buro Happold is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against BURO HAPPOLD
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C. and BURO HAPPOLD, INC in an amount in excess of
$300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of
this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST
COOKFOX ARCHITECTS, D.P.C.
NEGLIGENCE
44. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the
previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth
at length herein.
45. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to
Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se,
gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or
their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in:
a. Failing to adequately and properly design the fire suppression system, including
its drainage system and associated piping at the Building;
b. Failing to supervise the installation and testing of the fire suppression system at
the Building, including its drainage system and associated piping;
c. Filing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents,
subcontractors, employees and representatives to design the fire suppression
system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the Building;
d. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendant knew or should have known
would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building;
e. Failing to properly and adequately test the fire suppression system, including its
drainage system and associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of
harm to the Building;
f. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in
14 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
order to render the Building safe;
g. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations,
ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or relating to
the Building; and
h. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances.
46. As a result of Cook Fox’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount
in excess of $300,000.00, for which Cookfox is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against COOKFOX
ARCHITECTS, D.P.C. in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and
post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this
Court deems just and proper.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
AGAINST PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC.
NEGLIGENCE
47. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in
the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set
forth at length herein.
48. At all relevant times, Parkview had a duty to properly install, inspect, maintain,
and/or test the fire suppression system at the Building, including its associated drainage and
pumps in a way to prevent the occurrence of property damage sustained by the Building.
49. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to
Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se,
gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or
15 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in:
a. Failing to adequately and properly install, test and/or maintain the fire
suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and
associated piping;
b. Failing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents,
subcontractors, employees and representatives to properly install, test and/or
maintain the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage
system and associated piping;
c. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendant knew or should have known
would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building;
d. Failing to properly and adequately install, test and/or maintain the fire
suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and
associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm to the
Building;
e. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in
order to render the Building safe;
f. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations,
ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or
relating to the Building; and
g. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances.
50. As a result of Parkview’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in
excess of $300,000.00, for which Parkview is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against PARKVIEW
PLUMBING & HEATING, INC. together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest,
attorney’s fees, the costs of this suit, and such other relief as this Court may order.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
AGAINST RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC
NEGLIGENCE
51. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the
previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth
herein.
52. At all relevant times, RCI had a duty to install, inspect, maintain, and/or test the fire
16 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
protection system and perform the Work in a professional and workmanlike manner in order to
prevent the occurrence of property damage sustained by the Building.
53. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to
Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se,
gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or
their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in:
a. Failing to adequately and properly install, test and/or maintain the fire
suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and
associated piping;
b. Failing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents,
subcontractors, employees and representatives to properly install, test and/or
maintain the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage
system and associated piping;
c. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendant knew or should have known
would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building;
d. Failing to properly and adequately install, test and/or maintain the fire
suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and
associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm to the
Building;
e. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in
order to render the Building safe;
f. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations,
ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or
relating to the Building; and
g. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances.
54. As a result of RCI’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of
$3,000,000.00 for which RCI is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against RCI FIRE
PROTECTION LLC in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and
post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this
Court deems just and proper.
17 of 18
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024
Dated: Huntington, New York
June 11, 2024
Respectfully submitted,
SHEPS LAW GROUP P.C.
BY: ROBERT C. SHEPS
Attorney for Plaintiff
25 High Street
Huntington, New York 11743
(631) 249-5600
Our File No.: 8234
18 of 18
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ——————————————————————X Index No.: FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/o 25 Park Row Condominium and other interested insureds under the relevant policy of insurance New York County as the place of Trial -against- Basis of Venue is: Loss Location RAEL MAINTENANCE CORP., RAEL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC., G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, INC. G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC, URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC, BURO HAPPOLD CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C., BURO HAPPOLD, INC., COOKFOX ARCHITECTS, D.P.C, PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC., And RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC Defendant ——————————————————————X 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 Plaintiff’s attorney within twenty days after the service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service, where service is made by delivery upon you personally within the state, or, within 30 days after completion of service where service is made in any other manner. 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: Huntington, New York June 11, 2024 Respectfully submitted, SHEPS LAW GROUP P.C. BY: ROBERT C. SHEPS Attorney for Plaintiff 25 High Street Huntington, New York 11743 (631) 249-5600 Our File No.: 8234 1 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 TO: Rael Maintenance Corp. via Secretary of State Albany, New York Rael Automatic Sprinkler Company, Inc. via Secretary of State Albany, New York G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, INC. via Secretary of State Albany, New York G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC via Secretary of State Albany, New York Attelier Group, LLC via Secretary of State Albany, New York Buro Happold Consulting Engineers, P.C. via Secretary of State Albany, New York Buro Happold,Inc. via Secretary of State Albany, New York Cookfox Architects, D.P.C. via Secretary of State Albany, New York Parkview Plumbing & Heating, Inc. via Secretary of State Albany, New York RCI Fire Protection LLC via Secretary of State Albany, New York 2 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ——————————————————————X Index No.: FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/o 25 Park Row Condominium and other interested insureds under the relevant policy of insurance JURY TRIAL DEMANDED -against- RAEL MAINTENANCE CORP., RAEL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC., G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, INC. G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC, URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC, BURO HAPPOLD CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C., BURO HAPPOLD, INC., COOKFOX ARCHITECTS, D.P.C, PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC., And RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC ——————————————————————X COMPLAINT Plaintiff, FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/25 Park Row Condominium and other interested insureds under the relevant policy of insurance by and through its attorneys SHEPS LAW GROUP, P.C. complaining of the defendants RAEL MAINTENANCE CORP., RAEL AUTOMATIC, SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC., G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, INC., G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC, URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC, BURO HAPPOLD CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C., BURO HAPPOLD, INC., COOKFOX ARCHITECTS, D.P.C, PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC., and RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC alleges upon information and belief that at all times hereinafter mentioned: The Parties 1. Plaintiff, FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY was and is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, having its principal place of 3 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 business located at 777 San Marin Drive, Novato, California 94998, and was at all times material hereto, authorized to issue policies of insurance in the State of New York. 2. At all times pertinent hereto, plaintiff provided coverage to its insured, 25 Park Row Condominium (hereinafter “INSURED”), under a policy of insurance number NYP2007753- 20/NYX9007753-20 for the real and business property they owned and/or occupied at 25 Park Row, New York, NY 10038 ("hereinafter “THE PREMISES”). 3. At all relevant times, upon information and belief 25 Park Row Condominium (“25 Park Row”) was and still is a condominium association governed and/or operated by its Board of Managers, existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York with a principal place of business located at 25 Park Row, New York, NY 10038 (the “Building”). 4. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Rael Maintenance Corp., was and is a domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 1750 Plaza Avenue, New Hyde Park, NY 11040. 5. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Rael Automatic Sprinkler Company, Inc. was and still is a domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 1750 Plaza Avenue, New Hyde Park, NY 11040. 6. Rael Maintenance Corp. and Rael Automatic Sprinkler Company, Inc., at all relevant times, and upon information and belief, were entities associated with and/or related to one another, and/or operated in concert with each other, and conducted their business under the company name of Rael Fire Protection Company are collectively referred to as “Rael.” 4 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 7. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021 Rael was in the business of providing fire protection services and installed, inspected, maintained, and/or tested the fire protection system located at the Building. 8. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, INC., was and still is a domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 15 Indian Avenue, Mahopac, NY 10541. 9. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, G. A. FLEET ASSOCIATES, LLC., was and still is a domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 6 International Drive, Rye Brook, NY 10573. 10. G.A. Fleet Associates, Inc. and G.A. Fleet Associates, LLC at all relevant times, and upon information and belief, were entities associated with and/or related to one another, and/or operated in concert with each other, and conducted their business under the company name of Fleet collectively referred to as “Fleet.” 11. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021 Fleet was in the business of providing fire protection pumping systems and installed, inspected, maintained, and/or tested the fire protection pumps located at the Building. 12. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Urban Atelier Group, LLC (“UAG”) was and still is a foreign limited liability company, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with a principal place of business located at 85 Fifth Avenue, 12th Floor, New York, NY 10003. 13. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, UAG was and still is engaged in general construction services, including project development, construction management, project 5 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 management, including performing these services relating to the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system. 14. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Buro Happold Consulting Engineers, P.C. (“BHCE”), was and still is a domestic professional service corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 100 Broadway, 17th Floor, New York, NY 10005. 15. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021, BHCE was in the business of engineering, design, construction management and/or supervision, and it engineered, designed and/or oversaw the construction, installation, maintenance, and/or testing of the fire protection system located at the Building, including its drainage system. 16. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Buro Happold, Inc. was and is a domestic business corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 100 Broadway, 23rd Floor, New York, NY 10005. 17. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021, Buro Happold was in the business of engineering, design, construction management and/or supervision, and it engineered, designed and/or oversaw the construction, installation, maintenance, and/or testing of the fire protection system located at the Building, including its drainage system. 18. BHCE and Buro Happold, Inc. at all relevant times, and upon information and belief, were entities associated with and/or related to one another, and/or operated in concert with each other. BHCE and Buro Happold will be collectively referred to as “Buro Happold.” 19. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Cookfox Architects, D.P.C. (“Cookfox”), was and still is a domestic professional service corporation, duly organized and 6 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 existing under the laws of the State of New York, with a principal place of business located at 250 West 57th Street, 17th Floor, New York, NY 10107. 20. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021, Cookfox was in the business of architectural services, including the overseeing of construction, labor and/or services, and was the architect for the Building, including its fire protection system and including its drainage system. 21. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Parkview Plumbing & Heating, Inc. (“Parkview”) was and is a domestic business corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York having a place of business located at 2210 Reeds Mill Lane, Bronx, New York 10475. 22. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, prior to October 7, 2021, Parkview was in the business of providing plumbing and heating services and installed, inspected, maintained, and/or tested the fire protection system at the Building, including its associated drainage system and pump system. 23. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, RCI Fire Protection LLC (“RCI”) was and is a domestic limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York having a place of business located at 294 Garretson Avenue, Staten Island, New York 10305. 24. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, RCI was in the business of providing fire protection services and installed, inspected, maintained, and/or tested the fire protection system located at the Building, including its associated drainage system and pump system. 7 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 25. Prior to October 7, 2021 Fleet installed fire protection pump systems throughout the building including on the 48th floor. 26. Prior to October 7, 2021 Rael was conducting an inspection and/or testing of the fire protection system at the Building (the “Work”) when it caused a massive water overflow event by triggering the fire sprinkler system pump on the 48th floor to activate resulting in extreme flooding and severe property damage throughout the Building (“Loss”). 27. As a result of the water overflow, the drainage system at the Building was unable to properly and efficiently handle and drain the water. As a result, drainage was insufficient and/or delayed, which caused water to pool, and exacerbate the Loss by escaping from the mechanical room. 28. At all relevant times, Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company insured 25 Park Row Condominium for certain property and other damage under policy number NYP2007753- 20/NYX9007753-20 (“Policy”). 29. As a result of the Loss, 25 Park Row Condominium submitted an insurance claim to Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company whereby Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company adjusted and paid the claim and became subrogated to the claims of 25 Park Row Condominium, pursuant to the Policy, equity, and applicable law in an amount in excess of $300,000. 8 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST RAEL MAINTENANCE CORP. and RAEL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY NEGLIGENCE 30. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth herein. 31. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in: a. Failing to properly inspect, service and assess the fire pumps at the premises prior to the incident. b. Failing to educate itself about the operation of the fire suppression system, including understanding the location and the operation of the tanks, associated pumps and drainage; c. Failing to make appropriate inquiry to building personnel to educate itself about the operation of the fire suppression system, including the associated pumps and drainage; d. Failing to ensure it understood the operation of the associated pumps and piping for the fire suppression system before commencing its Work; e. Failing to properly maintain, operate and/or test the fire protection system; f. Failing to take appropriate steps to prepare for the Work, including understanding the operation of the associated pumps and piping for the fire suppression system; g. Failing to hire, train and supervise its employees, agents and/or subcontractors; h. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendants knew, or should have known, would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building because it failed to understand the fire suppression system’s operation and drainage; i. Failing to conduct the maintenance, operation and/or testing of the fire suppression system in a safe, proper, secure manner, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm to the property of Plaintiff’s insureds, which Defendants knew or should have known created an unreasonable risk of harm to the subject premises; j. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations 9 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 ordinances and/or industry customs related to the Work; and k. Failing to act reasonably under the circumstances. 32. As a result of Rael’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of $300,000.00 for which Rael is liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against RAEL MAINTENANCE CORP. and RAEL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST FLEET NEGLIGENCE 33. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth herein. 34. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in: a. failing to adequately, properly and safely design, assemble, inspect, install, maintain and test the subject fire pumps and related components at the building; b. failing to adequately and properly warn plaintiff’s insured of any maintenance requirements to keep the fire pumps in working order prior to the occurrence so as to avoid an unintended discharge of water; c. failing and omitting to do and perform those things necessary to avoid an unreasonable risk of harm to Plaintiff’s Insureds property as to render the operation of the subject fire pumps and related components safe and proper; d. failing to properly design, monitor, manufacture and inspect the subject fire pump and related components to avoid an unreasonable risk of water damage; 10 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 e. failing to properly design, manufacture install, and inspect the valves utilized by the subject fire pumps and related components to avoid an unreasonable risk of water damage; f. failing to safeguard the premises to avoid causing water damage to the Building including but not limited to poor drainage and water proofing of the structure; g. failing to provide adequate instruction and/or warning with respect to the proper operation, maintenance, and care of the fire pumps and related components; h. failing to recognize the obvious hazard presented by the improper installation, inspection and maintenance of the subject fire pumps and related components; i. failing to install the subject fire pumps and alarm system in a safe manner as to avoid a dangerous condition; j. failing to properly and adequately instruct its servants, contractors, employees and/or workmen as to the safe and proper installation of the subject fire pumps and related valves in the building; k. retaining incompetent, unlicensed employees, agents, servants, workers, subcontractors, without the requisite skills and abilities to install the subject fire pumps and related components in the building; l. failing to properly install, monitor, test and manage the BMS system which could have warned of system wide failures, and m. otherwise failing to use due care and proper skill under the circumstances. 35. As a result of Fleets negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of $300,000.00 for which Fleet is liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against FLEET in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC, NEGLIGENCE 36. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth at length herein. 37. At all relevant times, UAG had a duty to act with reasonable care, which included 11 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 designing, engineering, supervising the construction of the sprinkler maintenance system, including its drainage, at the Building. 38. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in: a. Failing to properly oversee the construction of the Building, including the fire suppression system and its associated drainage and piping system; b. Failing to adequately and properly design the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the Building; c. Failing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents, subcontractors, employees and representatives to design, test and install the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the Building; d. Creating a dangerous condition which defendant knew or should have known would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; e. Failing to properly and adequately test the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; f. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in order to render the Building safe; g. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations, ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or relating to the Building; h. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances. 39. As a result of UAG’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in the amount in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, for which UAG is liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against URBAN ATELIER GROUP, LLC in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 12 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST BURO HAPPOLD CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C. and BURO HAPPOLD, INC. NEGLIGENCE 40. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth at length herein. 41. At all relevant times, Buro Happold had a duty to act with reasonable care, which included designing, engineering, supervising the construction of the sprinkler maintenance system, including its drainage, at the Building. 42. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in: a. Failing to adequately and properly design the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the Building; b. Failing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents, subcontractors, employees and representatives to design and install the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the Building; c. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendant knew or should have known would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; d. Failing to properly and adequately test the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; e. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in order to render the Building safe; f. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations, ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or relating to the Building; and g. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances. 13 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 43. As a result of Buro Happold’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of $300,000.00 for which Buro Happold is liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against BURO HAPPOLD CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C. and BURO HAPPOLD, INC in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST COOKFOX ARCHITECTS, D.P.C. NEGLIGENCE 44. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth at length herein. 45. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in: a. Failing to adequately and properly design the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the Building; b. Failing to supervise the installation and testing of the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and associated piping; c. Filing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents, subcontractors, employees and representatives to design the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping at the Building; d. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendant knew or should have known would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; e. Failing to properly and adequately test the fire suppression system, including its drainage system and associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; f. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in 14 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 order to render the Building safe; g. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations, ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or relating to the Building; and h. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances. 46. As a result of Cook Fox’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, for which Cookfox is liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against COOKFOX ARCHITECTS, D.P.C. in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC. NEGLIGENCE 47. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth at length herein. 48. At all relevant times, Parkview had a duty to properly install, inspect, maintain, and/or test the fire suppression system at the Building, including its associated drainage and pumps in a way to prevent the occurrence of property damage sustained by the Building. 49. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or 15 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in: a. Failing to adequately and properly install, test and/or maintain the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and associated piping; b. Failing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents, subcontractors, employees and representatives to properly install, test and/or maintain the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and associated piping; c. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendant knew or should have known would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; d. Failing to properly and adequately install, test and/or maintain the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; e. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in order to render the Building safe; f. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations, ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or relating to the Building; and g. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances. 50. As a result of Parkview’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, for which Parkview is liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against PARKVIEW PLUMBING & HEATING, INC. together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the costs of this suit, and such other relief as this Court may order. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC NEGLIGENCE 51. Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the previous paragraphs of the Complaint with the same force and effect as if it was fully set forth herein. 52. At all relevant times, RCI had a duty to install, inspect, maintain, and/or test the fire 16 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 protection system and perform the Work in a professional and workmanlike manner in order to prevent the occurrence of property damage sustained by the Building. 53. The occurrence referred to in paragraph “26” and the consequent damage to Plaintiff’s Insureds’ property was proximately caused by the negligence, negligent per se, gross negligence, carelessness and/or negligent omissions of the respective defendants, and/or their agents, servants, workmen and/or employees in: a. Failing to adequately and properly install, test and/or maintain the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and associated piping; b. Failing to hire, train and/or supervise competent contractors, agents, subcontractors, employees and representatives to properly install, test and/or maintain the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and associated piping; c. Creating a dangerous condition which Defendant knew or should have known would create an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; d. Failing to properly and adequately install, test and/or maintain the fire suppression system at the Building, including its drainage system and associated piping, thereby creating an unreasonable risk of harm to the Building; e. Failing and omitting to do and perform those things which were necessary in order to render the Building safe; f. Failing to comply with applicable laws, statutes, codes, standards, regulations, ordinances and/or industry customs related to the work performed at or relating to the Building; and g. Otherwise failing to act reasonably under the circumstances. 54. As a result of RCI’s negligence, Plaintiff sustained damage in an amount in excess of $3,000,000.00 for which RCI is liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against RCI FIRE PROTECTION LLC in an amount in excess of $300,000.00, together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, the cost of this lawsuit and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 17 of 18 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2024 02:22 PM INDEX NO. 155379/2024 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2024 Dated: Huntington, New York June 11, 2024 Respectfully submitted, SHEPS LAW GROUP P.C. BY: ROBERT C. SHEPS Attorney for Plaintiff 25 High Street Huntington, New York 11743 (631) 249-5600 Our File No.: 8234 18 of 18