FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/08/ :47 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/08/2015

Transcription

1 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/08/ PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF 10/08/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x GFI INSURANCE BROKERAGE, INC., Plaintiff, - against - ANTHONY RAGAINI and ARM-CAPACITY OF NEW YORK, LLC, Defendants. x Index No. SUMMONS Venue is proper in New York County pursuant to CPLR 503(c) TO Anthony Ragaini 26 Evan Place Staten Island, New York ARM-Capacity of New York, LLC 90 Broad Street, Suite 1503 New York, New York YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED, to answer the Verified Complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your Answer on the Plaintiff s attorneys within twenty (20) days after the service of this Summons, exclusive of the day of service, or within thirty (30) days after the completion of service made in any manner other than personal delivery within the State of New York. In case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the Verified Complaint. Dated October 8, 2015 FARRELL FRITZ, P.C. By /s/ Domenique Camacho Moran Domenique Camacho Moran Franklin C. McRoberts Attorneys for Plaintiff 1320 RXR Plaza Uniondale, New York (516) Interwoven\

2 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x GFI INSURANCE BROKERAGE, INC., Index No. Plaintiff, VERIFIED COMPLAINT - against - ANTHONY RAGAINI and ARM-CAPACITY OF NEW YORK, LLC, Defendants. x Plaintiff GFI Insurance Brokerage, Inc. ( GFI ), by its attorneys, Farrell Fritz, P.C., as and for its Verified Complaint, alleges as follows THE PARTIES 1. GFI is a New York corporation with its principal place of business at 140 Broadway, 41st Floor, New York, New York GFI is a retail insurance brokerage firm. 3. Upon information and belief, Defendant Anthony Ragaini ( Ragaini ) is an individual residing at 26 Evan Place, Staten Island, New York Ragaini is a former employee of GFI. 5. Upon information and belief, Ragaini is a current employee of Defendant ARM- Capacity of New York, LLC ( ARM ). 6. Upon information and belief, ARM is a New York limited liability company with its principal place of business at 90 Broad Street, Suite 1503, New York, New York Upon information and belief, ARM is a retail insurance brokerage firm. 8. ARM is a direct competitor of GFI. 1

3 FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS 9. On or about September 1, 2013, GFI and Ragaini entered into a written employment agreement (the Agreement ). 10. Pursuant to the Agreement, GFI agreed to employ Ragaini as a retail insurance broker on an at-will basis in consideration for a base salary and commissions. 11. As a condition of his employment with GFI, Ragaini agreed to several restrictive covenants, which concerned, among other things, confidentiality, non-solicitation, noncompetition and non-disparagement. 12. Section 7(c) of the Agreement provides If Employee s employment with the Company terminates for any reason including, but not limited to, voluntary resignation, Employee shall not for a period of eighteen (18) months following such termination, directly or indirectly, solicit or cause or permit to be solicited any client of the Company that Employee acquired while an employee of the Company. 13. Section 12 of the Agreement provides All terms and conditions of this Agreement that by reasonable implication are meant to survive the termination of this Agreement, including but not limited to, the Restrictive Covenants, shall remain in full force and effect after the termination of this Agreement. 14. Ragaini acquired several customers while an employee of GFI, including, without limitation, Apple Core Hotels, Inc. ( Apple Core ), New Generation Management Corp. ( New Generation ) and 6 West, LLC ( 6 West ), pursuant to which each entity engaged GFI as broker of record. 15. On or about April 22, 2014, GFI terminated Ragaini s employment. 16. Upon information and belief, after GFI terminated Ragaini s employment, Ragaini became employed by ARM. 2

4 17. On or about July 15, 2015, while Ragaini s covenant against solicitation with GFI remained in full force and effect, GFI learned that Apple Core had replaced GFI with a new broker of record for its workers compensation coverage. 18. On or about July 15, 2015, while Ragaini s covenant against solicitation with GFI remained in full force and effect, GFI learned that New Generation had replaced GFI with a new broker of record for its workers compensation coverage. 19. On or about July 21, 2015, while Ragaini s covenant against solicitation with GFI remained in full force and effect, GFI learned that Apple Core had replaced GFI with a new broker of record for its directors and officers liability coverage. 20. On or about July 27, 2015, GFI sent Ragaini a letter demanding that Ragaini cease and desist from soliciting clients of GFI that Ragaini acquired while an employee of GFI. 21. Ragaini ignored GFI s cease-and-desist letter. 22. On or about August 24, 2015, while Ragaini s covenant against solicitation with GFI remained in full force and effect, GFI learned that 6 West had replaced GFI with a new broker of record for its workers compensation coverage. 23. On or about September 29, 2015, while Ragaini s covenant against solicitation with GFI remained in full force and effect, GFI learned that Apple Core had replaced GFI with a new broker of record for its commercial package coverage. 24. On or about October 7, 2015, while Ragaini s covenant against solicitation with GFI remained in full force and effect, GFI learned that Apple Core had replaced GFI with a new broker of record for its property coverage. 25. Upon information and belief, Ragaini breached his non-solicitation agreement with GFI by soliciting and inducing, without limitation, each of Apple Core, New Generation 3

5 and 6 West to cease being clients of GFI, and to become clients of ARM, thereby replacing GFI as broker of record. 26. Upon information and belief, Ragaini engaged in the foregoing conduct at the inducement and under the express direction of his new employer and GFI s direct competitor, ARM. herein. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Breach of Contract Ragaini) 27. GFI repeats and realleges each of the foregoing allegations as if set forth fully 28. The Agreement was a valid and binding contract between GFI and Ragaini. 29. Pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Agreement, the covenant that Ragaini would not solicit customers he acquired while employed by GFI is fully enforceable because it survives until 18 months after the expiration of Ragaini s employment with GFI, that is, until on or about October 22, GFI fully performed under the Agreement by, among other things, paying Ragaini all base salary and commissions owed through the date of his termination. 31. Ragaini breached the Agreement by soliciting and inducing several customers Ragaini acquired while an employee of GFI, including, without limitation, Apple Core, New Generation and 6 West, to terminate their relationships with GFI and become clients of GFI s direct competitor, ARM. 32. As a result of Ragaini s breaches, GFI has lost, and will continue to lose, valuable commissions from placement of insurance policies that, but for Ragaini s breaches, GFI otherwise would have placed. 33. As a result, GFI has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial. 4

6 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Tortious Interference with Existing Contract ARM) 34. GFI repeats and realleges each of the foregoing allegations as if set forth fully herein. 35. GFI had a valid and existing Agreement with Ragaini, Section 7(c) of which prohibited Ragaini from soliciting customers Ragaini acquired while an employee of GFI until 18 months after the expiration of Ragaini s employment with GFI, that is, until on or about October 22, ARM was aware of the Agreement, including the covenant against solicitation set forth in Section 7(c). 37. ARM intentionally and improperly procured and induced Ragaini s breach. 38. As more fully described above, Ragaini breached the Agreement. 39. Ragaini would not have breached the Agreement but for ARM s procurement and inducement to do so. 40. But for ARM s procurement and inducement to do so, Ragaini would not have breached the Agreement, and GFI would have continued to serve as broker of record for Apple Core, New Generation Management and 6 West. 41. As a result, GFI has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial. WHEREFORE, GFI demands judgment as follows a. On the First Cause of Action, money damages against Ragaini in an amount to be determined at trial; b. On the Second Cause of Action, money damages against ARM in an amount to be determined at trial; c. reasonable attorneys fees costs, and disbursements; and d. such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 5

7 Dated October 8, 2015 FARRELL FRITZ, P.C. By /s/ Domenique Camacho Moran Domenique Camacho Moran Franklin C. McRoberts Attorneys for Plaintiff 1320 RXR Plaza Uniondale, New York (516) Interwoven\

8