FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/05/2016 04:48 PM INDEX NO. 450633/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 40 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/05/2016 Exhibit 1
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1,,, RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/08/20lc SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS. --------------------------------------------------------------)( DANCO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. Index No. Date Purchased: SUMMONS -----. -- - - -against- Plaintiff, Plaintiff's Place of Business: 40-17 24th Street, Long Island City, New York 11101 DORMITORY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Defendant. --------------------------------------------------------------)( The basis of venue designated is: Plaintiff's Principal Place of Business TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT 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 (20) days after the service of this summons, exclusive of the date of service (or within thirty (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. The basis of venue is the location of Plaintiff's principal place of business. Dated:Jericho, New York February 6, 2013 TO: TUNSTEAD & SCHECHTER Dormitory Authority Of The State Of New York 515 Broadway Albany, New York 12207 y: arvin Schechter, Esq. 500 North Broadway, Suite 101 Jericho, New York 11753 (516) 822-4400
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS -------------------------------------x DANCO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. DORMITORY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff Index No. VERIFIED COMPLAINT Defendant ------------------------------------x Plaintiff, Danco Electrical Contractors, Inc. by its attorneys, Tunstead & Schechter, complaining of the Defendant, Dormitory Authority of the State of New York alleges: FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (For Contract Balance) 1. The Plaintiff, Danco Electrical Contractors, Inc. ("Danco") is a New York corporation having its principal place of business at 40-17 24th Street, Long Island City, New York 11101. 2. The Defendant, The Dormitory Authority of the State of New York ("DASNY"), is a public benefit corporation with the power to sue and be sued in its own name, having an office at 515 Broadway, Albany, New York 12207-2916. 3. On or about April 11, 2006, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a written contract (the "Contract") in which the Plaintiff agreed to provide all work to complete the "New West 1
Quad Building - Electrical Work at Brooklyn College, DA#120160, 1450909999/CR72" located in Brooklyn, New York (the "Project"). The Contract was in the sum of $7,395,416.00. 4. The Contract was in all respects regular and was duly approved by all persons, officials and public bodies necessary to render same valid, binding and enforceable against the Defendant, and the Contract was duly funded. 5. The Plaintiff thereupon entered into the performance of the Contract and duly performed all of the terms and conditions of said Contract on its part to be performed. 6. The work performed under the Contract was completed by the Plaintiff and accepted by the Defendant as being complete. 7. By reason of additions to or deductions from the work required to be performed under the Contract, in the sum of $1,964,648.00 agreed to by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Contract price was adjusted and fixed by the Defendant at the sum of $9,360,064.00. 8. Payments have been made by the Defendant on account of said Contract in the sum of $8,144,550.00. 9. By reason of the foregoing, there is due and owing to the Plaintiff by the Defendant the balance of the Contract monies in the sum of $1, 215, 514. 00, no part of which has been paid although duly demanded. Based on the foregoing the Defendant has thereby breached the Contract. 2
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (For Extra and Additional Work) 10. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation set forth in the paragraphs herein designated "1" through "9" and hereby incorporates the same as part of this cause of action with the same force and effect as though fully set forth at length herein. 11. At the special instance and request of the Defendant, Plaintiff performed certain extra and additional work in addition to the work required by the Contract as follows: Danco c.o. No. Danco Amount 53 $ 10,255.00 46R 53,112.00 61 214,933.00 63 99,441.00 73 17,792.00 81 7,870.00 85 16,615.00 91 1,968.00 94 9,464.00 95 11,434.00 99 7,709.00 147 5,903.00 149 5,903.00 152 6,053.00 153 96,130.00 15'/ 90,577.00 163 224,126.00 167 33,448.00 180 28,062.00 3
Danco c.o. No. Danco Amount 182 $ 36,370.00 195 3,736.00 197 76,947.00 199 22,498.00 200 10' 691. 00 201 3,825.00 206 5,511.00 207 1,968.00 209 3,515.00 210 21,812.00 211 8,372.00 212 8,467.00 213 179,257.00 214 3,520.00 215 19,306.00 216 9,721.00 217 16,939.00 218 12,104.00 219 22,112.00 223 29,987.23 224 6,240.00 Total $1,443,693.23 12. The Plaintiff has performed all of the extra and additional work for the above listed items on its part to be performed. The sum of $1,443,693.23 is the fair and reasonable value of the labor furnished and materials supplied by the Plaintiff for performing the aforesaid extra and additional work. 13. The Plaintiff has requested the Defendant to pay the sum of $1,443,693.23 for the extra and additional work performed and the Defendant has failed and refused to pay the Plaintiff 4
the sum requested. Based on the foregoing the Defendant has thereby breached the Contract. 14. By reason of the foregoing there is due and owing to the Plaintiff by the Defendant the sum of $1,443,693.23 no part of which has been paid although duly demanded. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (For Forced Change Order Work) 15. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation set forth in the paragraphs herein designated "l" through "14" and hereby incorporates the same as part of this cause of action with the same force and effect as though fully set forth at length herein. 16. At the special instance and request of the Defendant, Plaintiff performed certain extra and additional work in addition to the work required by the Contract. The Defendant agreed that the work was extra and additional to the Contract but failed and refused to pay the Plaintiff the full amount of the cost of the work. 17. The Defendant issued "Forced Change Orders" to the Plaintiff in which the Defendant dictated the amount of monies it would agree to pay the Plaintiff for each item of work. The Plaintiff did not agree to the amount of monies dictated by the Defendant and the Plaintiff did not sign the Forced Change Orders. 5
18. The following is a listing of the Forced Change orders issued by the Defendant. FORCED CHANGE ORDERS Danco C.O. No. Danco Amount DAS NY Amount Difference 24 54 97 125 133 148 155 159 161 162 174 181 193 202 203 208 $ 89,438.00 19,675.00 311, 941. 00 166,042.00 8,588.00 73,918.00 87,779.00 3,935.00 29,513.00 47,661.00 54,714.00 10,650.00 46,123.00 17,973.00 19, 145.00 3,163.00 $ 30,961.00 1,967.00 16,410.00 39,238.00 3,016.00 28,157.00 8,457.00 1,967.00 2,811.00 4,018.00 5,140.00 5,992.00 16,701.00 9,992.00 9,997.00 2,073.00 $ 58,477.00 17,708.00 295,531.00 126,804.00 5,572.00 45,761.00 79,322.00 1,968.00 26,702.00 43,643.00 49,574.00 4,658.00 29,422.00 7,981.00 9,148.00 1,090.00 Total $990,258.00 $186,897.00 $803, 361. 00 19. The Plaintiff has performed all of the extra and additional work for the listed items of Forced Change Order work on its part to be performed. The sum of $990,258.00 is the fair and reasonable value of the labor furnished and materials supplied by the Plaintiff for performing the aforesaid extra and additional Forced Change Order work. 20. The Defendant has failed and refused to pay the Forced Change Order work in the sum of $990,258.00. 6
21. The Plaintiff has requested the Defendant to pay the sum of $ 990, 258. 0 0 for the costs of the extra and additional Forced Change Order work and the Defendant has failed and refused to pay the Plaintiff the sum requested. Based on the foregoing the Defendant has thereby breached the Contract. 22. By reason of the foregoing, there is due and owing to the Plaintiff by the Defendant the sum of $990,258.00 no part of which has been although duly demanded. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Quantum Meruit) 23. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation set forth in the paragraphs herein designated "l" through "22" and hereby incorporates the same as part of this cause of action with the same force and effect as though fully set forth at length herein. 24. Plaintiff, in good faith, provided work and materials in order to perform the contract. 25. The Defendant accepted Plaintiff's work and materials. 26. Plaintiff expected to be compensated by the Defendant for its work and materials which had a reasonable value of at least $3,649,465.23. 27. The Defendant has not paid the Plaintiff any monies for its work and materials as set forth above. 7
28. Al though the Defendant benefited from these services, the Defendant failed and refused to make payment to the Plaintiff for the work and materials, despite due, adequate and frequent demand by the Plaintiff. 2 9. By reason of the foregoing, the Plaintiff has been damaged by the Defendant in the amount of $3,649,465.23. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Account Stated 30. Plaintiff repeats and repeats and realleges each and every allegation set for in paragraphs herein designated "l" through "29" and hereby incorporates the same part of this cause of action with the same force and effect as though fully set forth at length herein. 31. Plaintiff furnished invoices and statements of account to the Defendant in the amount of $3,649,465.23 with respect to the labor, equipment, materials and other services provided to Defendant at the Project. 32. Defendant received said invoices and statements of account and has failed to contest or refute same thereby creating an account stated between the parties. 33. By reason of the aforesaid, the amount of $3,649,465.23 is due and owing to Plaintiff from Defendant. 8
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Unjust Enrichment) 34. Plaintiff repeats and repeats and realleges each and every allegation set for in the paragraphs herein designated "l" through "33" and hereby incorporates the same part of this cause of action with the same force and effect as though fully set forth at length herein. 35. Plaintiff at the special insistence and request of Defendant performed all the labor on its part to be performed, and furnished all the materials on its part to be furnished, and otherwise provided good and valuable services to Defendant in connection with the Project. 36. The fair and reasonable value of the labor performed and the material furnished was $3,649,465.23, no part of which has been paid by the Defendant, leaving the sum of $3,649,465.23 due and owing to Plaintiff from Defendant. 37. Plaintiff has requested Defendant to pay the sum of $3,649,465.23 and Defendant has failed and refused to pay Plaintiff the sum requested. 38. Defendant has been enriched with the work, labor and services provided by Plaintiff concerning the Project. 39. Defendant has not benefit received from Plaintiff. compensated Plaintiff for the Defendant's retention of these benefits is unjust. 9
40. As a result of the foregoing, Defendant has been unjustly enriched at Plaintiff's expense, and Plaintiff is entitled to an award of money damages against Defendant in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than $3,473,282.00 plus interest, cost and disbursements, and reasonable attorney's fees for bringing this action. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendant as follows: FIRST: SECOND: THIRD: $1,215,514.00 on the First Cause of Action; $1,443,693.23 on the Second Cause of Action; $990,258.00 on the Third Cause of Action; FOURTH: $3,649,465.23 on the Fourth Cause of Action FIFTH: $3,649,465.23 on the Fifth Cause of Action; and SIXTH: $3,649,465.23 on the Sixth Cause of Action. with interest thereon, disbursements of this action. together with costs and Dated: Jericho, New York February 6, 2013 TUNSTEAD & SCHECHTER DancoDASNYComp2/6/13/dd By 10 ~ ~.:: Michael Mattia, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff 500 North Broadway Jericho, New York 11753 516 822-4400
CORPORATE VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK) ) SS.: COUNTY OF NASSAU ) Danny Ramnarain, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I am the President of Danco Electrical Contractors, Inc. ("Danco"), the Plaintiff herein, and I have read the foregoing Verified Complaint and know the contents thereof; is true to my knowledge, based upon a review of the books and records maintained by Danco, and based upon conversations with officers and employees of Danco, except as to those matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. DANCO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. Sworn to before me this 6th day of February, 2013 DancoDASNYComp2/6/13/dd 11
INDEX NO. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS --------------------------------------------------------------)( DANCO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. -against- Plaintiff, DORMITORY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OFNEWYORK, Defendant. --------------------------------------------------------------)( SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT TUN STEAD & SCHECHTER Attorneys for Plaintiff 500 North Broadway, Suite 101 Jericho, New York 11753 (516) 822-4400 Signature/Certification (Rule 130-1.1-a) The undersigned, an attorney at law duly licensed to practice law in the State of New York, certifies that, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, the presentation of the paper(s) or contention(s) annexed hereto are not frivolous as defined in subsection (s) of section 130-1.1. By: Marvin Schechter Esq.,
Exhibit 2 2
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS DANCO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC., Plaintiff, Index No. 700428-2013 - against - DORMITORY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, VERIFIED ANSWER Defendant. Defendant Donnitory Authority of the State of New York, by its attorneys Holland & Knight LLP, hereby answers the complaint of plaintiff Danco Electrical Contractors, Inc. ("Danco") as follows: ANSWERING THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION I. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph I of the complaint. 2. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the complaint. 3. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the complaint, except admits that DASNY and Danco entered into a contract with respect to construction work at the West Quad Building at Brooklyn College, which contract is comprised of written documents that are the best evidence of the contract's contents and terms. 4. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the complaint, except admits that DASNY and Danco entered into a contract with respect to construction work at the West Quad Building at
Brooklyn College, which contract is comprised of written documents that are the best evidence of the contract's contents and terms. 5. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 5 of the complaint. 6. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 6 of lhe complaint. 7. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 7 of the complaint, except admits that there were changes to the parties' contract which adjusted the contract price. 8. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient.to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the complaint. 9. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 9 of the complaint. ANSWERING THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 10. Repeats and realleges each and every answer to the paragraphs incorporated by reference in paragraph 10 of the complaint, as if fully set forth herein. 11. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 11 of the complaint. 12. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 12 of the complaint. 13. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 13 of the complaint. 14. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 14 of the complaint. ANSWERING THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 15. Repeats and realleges each and every answer to the paragraphs incorporated by reference in paragraph 15 of the complaint, as if fully set forth herein. 16. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 16 of the complaint. 17. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient to fonn a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 17 of the complaint. #12788141 vi 2
18. DAS NY is without knowledge or infonnation sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 18 of the complaint. 19. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 19 of the complaint. 20. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 20 of the complaint. 21. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 21 of the complaint. 22. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 22 of the complaint. ANSWERING THE FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 23. Repeats and realleges each and every answer to the paragraphs incorporated by reference in paragraph 23 of the complaint, as if fully set forth herein. 24. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient to fonn a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 24 of the complaint, except admits that Danco provided some labor and materials to the project. 25. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 25 of the complaint. 26. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient to fonn a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the complaint. 27. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient to fonn a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 27 of the complaint. 28. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 28 of the complaint. 29. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 29 of the complaint. ANSWERING THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 30. Repeats and realleges each and every answer to the paragraphs incorporated by reference in paragraph 30 of the complaint, as if fully set forth herein. 31. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 31 of the complaint. 3 1112788141_vl
32. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 32 of the complaint. 33. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 33 of the complaint. ANSWERING THE SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 34. Repeats and realleges each and every answer to the paragraphs incorporated by reference in paragraph 34 of the complaint, as if fully set forth herein. 35. DASNY is without knowledge or information sufficient to f01m a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 35 of the complaint, except admits that Danco provided some labor and materials to the project. 36. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 36 of the complaint. 37. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 37 of the complaint. 38. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 38 of the complaint. 39. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 39 of the complaint. 40. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 40 of the complaint. FIRST DEFENSE 41. Danco's claims have been fully or partially paid by DASNY. SECOND DEFENSE 42. One or more of the causes of action contained in Danco's complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. THIRD DEFENSE 43. Danco's claims are barred by reason ofdaneo's failure to comply with conditions precedent, including but not limited to notice provisions contained in the parties' contract. FOURTH DEFENSE 44. Danco's claims are baned by reason of waiver and/or release. 4 1112788141 vl
FIFTH DEFENSE 45. Danco's claims are barred by reason of Danco's material breach and/or abandonment of the parties' contract. SIXTH DEFENSE 46. Danco's claims are ban-ed by the doctrine of estoppel. SEVENTH DEFENSE 47. Danco's claims are ban-ed by the doctrine of unclean hands. WHEREFORE, defendant DASNY demands judgment dismissing the complaint in its entirety, together with the costs and disbursements of this action, attorneys' fees, and such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Dated: New York, New York April 5, 2013 HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP Attorneys for Defendant By:~fa~l~ Timothy B. Froessel 31 West 52nd Street New York, NY 10019 (212) 513-3200 #1278814l_vl 5
VEIUFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF ALBANY ) SS.: STEPHAN A. BOJKO, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I am an Assistant General Counsel of defendant Dormitory Authority of the State of New York ("DASNY"). I have read the foregoing Verified Answer, and the contents thereof are true to the best of my knowledge, based upon information contained in DASNY's books and records and conversations with employees of DASNY, except as to matters staled therein to be alleged upon information and belief; and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. Sworn to before me this 5' 11 day of April, 2013. ' -... -i:j.j \, '/4_,u L,\\ rd,cl 0 r\tary Public K rll YA. WHITBECK Notary Public, State of New Yock No. 01WH6068431 Qualified in Albany CountY 1 1... Commission Expires December 31. 20.J.,.,J 6 ffl2788!41 vl
AFFIRMATION OF SERVICE TIMOTHY B. FROESSEL, an attorney duly admitted to practice before the Courts of New York State, affim1s the following under penalty of perjury: 1. I am over eighteen years of age, I am not a party to this action, and I reside in the State of New York. 2. On April 5, 2013, I served the foregoing Verified Answer upon: Marvin Schechter, Esq. Tunstead & Schechter 500 North Broadway, Suite 101 Jericho, NY 11753 the address designated for service, by depositing same, enclosed in a properly addressed wrapper, first-class postage pre-paid, in an official depository under the exclusive care and custody of the United States Postal Service within the State of New York. Dated: New York, New York April 5, 2013 (k~&~~. ~ TIM OT YB. F \IBssEL. #21066117 vi
soo 222 :510.,,~.,...,.aslegol.com Index No. 700428/2013 Year 20 SUPREME COURT OF TllE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS DANCO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC., Plain ti tr; -against- DORMfrORY AUTHORITY OF TIIE ST J\ TE OF NEW YORK, Defendant. VERIFIED ANSWER Attorneys for HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP De;fendant - Dorrnito1y Authority o,f the State of New York 31 West 52nd Street New York, N.Y. 10019 (212) 513-3200 Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1-a, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, certifies that, upon information and belief and reasonable inquiry, (1) the contentions contained in the annexed docurnent are not frivolous and that (2) if the annexed docurnent is an initiating pleading, (i) the matter was not obtained through illegal conduct, or that if it was, the attorney or other persons responsible for the illegal conduct are not participating in the matter or sharing in any fee earned therefrom and that (ii) if the matter involves potential claims for personal injury or wrongful death, the matter was not obtained in violation of22 NYCRR 1200.41-a. Dated:.... Signature.... Service of a copy of the within Dated: Print Signer's Name.... is hereby admitted. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE ~. D that the within is a. (certified) true copy of a. " NOTICE OF entered i.n the office of the cleric of the wi.thin-nmned Court on -~ 20 ENTRY " < ] u D NOTICE OF <it on 111 1709250 v I SETTLEMENT D<ited: Attorney(s) for that an Order of which the within is a true copy will be presented for settlement to the Hon., one of the judges qf the within-n<imed Court, 20, at M. Attorneys for HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP To: 31 West 52nd Street New York, N.Y. 10019
Exhibit 3 3
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------x DANCO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC., Plaintiff, -against- DORMITORY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Page 197 Defendant. Index No.: 450633-2013 --------------------------------------x 500 North Broadway Jericho, New York December 17, 2014 9:33 a.rn. CONTINUED EXAMINATION BEFORE TRIAL of DANNY RAMNARAIN, appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff, pursuant to Order, before Larin Kaywood, a Notary Public of the State of New York. MAGNA8 LEGAL SERVICES
Page 198 1 A P P E A R A N C E S: 2 3 TUNSTEAD & SCHECHTER Attorneys for Plaintiff 4 500 North Broadway Jericho, New York 11753 5 BY: MICHAEL J. MATTIA, ESQ. 6 7 HOLLAND & KNIGHT 8 Attorneys for Defendant 31 West 52nd Street 9 10 BY: New York, New York 10019 TIMOTHY FROESSEL, ESQ. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MAGNA8 LEGAL SERVICES
I - _l 1 DANNY RAMNARAIN Page 199 2 D A N N Y R A M N A R A I N, called as a witness, 3 having been duly sworn by a Notary Public, was examined 4 and testified as follows: 5 CONTINUED EXAMINATION BY 6 MR. FROESSEL: 7 Q. Please state your name for the record. ] l.,j l j 8 A. Danny Ramnarain. 9 Q. What is your current address? 10 A. 40-17 24th Street, Long Island City, New 11 York 11101. 12 MR. FROESSEL: Please mark this 13 as DASNY Exhibit 193. 14 (Whereupon, DASNY Exhibit 193 15 was marked for identification.) 16 Q. Let's get started. Picking up where we 17 left off yesterday and starting with another 18 change order, I'm going to show you what has ] 19 been marked as DASNY 193. It's an e-mail from 20 Hugette Verdeguer, it's an e-mail chain, the 21 e-mail at the end of the chain is from Hugette 22 Verdeguer to jven214@optonline.net. It's dated 23 April 9, 2009. Please take a look at that and 24 let me know if you've seen that before. 25 A. (Reviewing.) MAGNA8 LEGAL SERVICES
Page 239 1 DANNY RAMNARAIN 2 record for one second, Mike? 3 MR. MATTIA: Sure. 4 (Whereupon, a short discussion 5 was held off the record.) 6 MR. FROESSEL: Plaintiff's 7 counsel and I have agreed to stipulote 8 that as to one of the change orders 9 involved which involves Danco change 10 order proposal 63 which concerns WQ209 11 which was work for Bulletin 30 which was 12 then given change order number 79 by 13 DASNY, that that change order was 14 approved in the amount of $82,000. It 15 was signed by Danny Ramnarain for Danco 16 and therefore there's an agreement on 17 that one and it's no longer in dispute; 18 is that correct? 19 MR. MATTIA: Yeah, that's fine. 20 Off the record. 21 (Whereupon, a short discussion 22 was held off the record.) 23 (Whereupon, DASNY Exhibit 209 24 was marked for identification.) 25 Q. I'll show you what has been marked as MAGNA9 LEGAL SERVICES
Page 391 1 2 3 C E R T I F I C A T E 4 5 I, LARIN KAYWOOD, a Notary Public within and for 6 the State of New York, do hereby certify: 7 That DANNY RAMNARAIN, the witness whose deposition B is hereinbefore set forth, was duly sworn by me and 9 that such deposition is a true record of the testimony 10 given by such witness. 11 I further certify that I am not related to any 12 of the parties to this action by blood or marriage; 13 and that I am in no way interested in the outcome 14 of this matter. 15 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 16 this 31st day of December, 2014. 17 18 19 LARIN KAYWOOD 20 21 22 23 24 25 MAGNA& LEGAL SERVICES