FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03312019 03:25 P
`NEYSC.F DOC. NO.
`
`1
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`INDEX NO- 152230/2019
`
`
`
`
`
`R«C«IV«D NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`
`COUNTY OF NEWYORK
`_____________________________________________ 1
`
`DARRELL MAYS and TARA MAYS
`
`Index No.
`
`P1aintiff(s),
`
`.
`-agamst-
`
`fiummnns
`
`JOHN ROBERTSHAW, individually and as Trustee of the
`ROBERTSHAW CHARiTABLE REMAINDER TRUST.
`dated June 22. 2016 and ELIZABETH ROBERTSHAW
`
`Date Index No. Purchased:
`
`March 1' 2019
`
`To the above named Defendant(s)
`
`JOHN ROBERTSHAW and ELIZABETH ROBERTSHAW
`
`You are hereby summoned to answer the complaint in this action and to serve
`a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this summons, to serve
`a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiffs attorney within 20 days after the service of
`this summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is
`complete if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New
`York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against
`you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint.
`
`The basis of venue is CPLR §§ 503 and 507
`
`WhiCh is the residence of the Plaintiffs and location of the real property
`
`Dated: 3/1/2019
`
`CHIPMAN BROWN CICERO & COLE. LLP
`
`WM,
`
`
`Adam D. Cole
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`501 Fifth Avenue. 15th Floor
`New York, New York 10017
`646-685-8363
`
`lof25
`1 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`COUNTY OF NEW YORK
`------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`DARRELL MAYS and TARA MAYS,
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`-against-
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`JOHN ROBERTSHAW, individually and as Trustee of the :
`ROBERTSHAW CHARITABLE REMAINDER TRUST, :
`dated June 22, 2016 and ELIZABETH ROBERTSHAW,
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`:
`------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`
`
`
`
`Index No.
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs Darrell Mays and Tara Mays (the “Mays” or “Plaintiffs”), by their attorneys
`
`Chipman, Brown, Cicero & Cole LLP, as and for their Complaint against Defendants, John
`
`Robertshaw, in both his individual capacity and as Trustee of the Robertshaw Charitable
`
`Remainder Trust, dated June 22, 2016, and Elizabeth Robertshaw (collectively, the “Defendants”),
`
`allege as follows:
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`On the very first exciting day of their $43,000 per month Manhattan townhouse
`
`mansion rental, the Mays discovered they had a rodent problem. The townhouse mansion (the
`
`“Mansion”) consists of approximately 10,000 square feet of living space and straddles 166 East
`
`81st and 179 East 80th Streets. The Mansion had been marketed, through Defendants’ broker, the
`
`Corcoran Group, as an “extraordinary and truly rare property,” thereby justifying its sizeable
`
`monthly rent.
`
`2.
`
`Over the course of only a week or two thereafter, the “problem” that emerged was
`
`that the “extraordinary and truly rare” Mansion was extraordinarily and truly infested with vermin.
`
`Over the next six months, multiple attempts were made in vain to battle the severe infestation, with
`
`2 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`the Mays finding themselves continuously disposing of dead rodents, dodging live rodents,
`
`cleaning rodent droppings and living with the toxic odor caused when unlocated dead rodents
`
`decompose. Indeed, the Mays ultimately became prisoners to the infestation and were forced to
`
`choose between staying close to home to be available to endure the gruesome and repugnant chore
`
`of disposing of the newly-dead or enjoying a vacation only to return to the toxic stench of
`
`decomposed vermin. Under any definition, the Mansion was, and remains, uninhabitable for its
`
`purpose as a residence where humans are meant to live.
`
`3.
`
`Defendants knew when they marketed the purportedly “extraordinary and truly rare
`
`property” both for sale over the course of at least one year, and then for lease, that the Mansion
`
`was infested with vermin and, as a result, was unfit for human habitation and was dangerous to
`
`health, life and safety. Defendants also knew, or should have known, that the Mansion’s central
`
`functions – such as its air conditioning, heating, refrigerator, washer and other elements – were in
`
`disrepair and failing.
`
`4.
`
`Defendants nevertheless represented to the Mays before and on June 30, 2018 that
`
`the Mansion was “fit for human living and there is no condition dangerous to health, life or safety.”
`
`Both representations were knowingly false when made. Defendants also promised before and on
`
`June 30, 2018 that the Mansion would provide the Mays with two years of quiet enjoyment. The
`
`promises were also knowingly false.
`
`5.
`
`Relying upon Defendants’ false representations and promises, the Mays entered
`
`into two-year leases (the “Leases”), agreeing to pay $43,000 per month for the opportunity to make
`
`the Mansion their home. Copies of the Leases are attached as Exhibit “A”.
`
`6.
`
`The vermin infestation constitutes a breach of the Defendants’ express warranty of
`
`habitability, entitling the Mays to damages or a 100% abatement in past and future rent. In this
`
`
`
`2
`
`3 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`case, however, Defendants’ affirmative representations that the Mansion was fit for human living
`
`and there was no condition dangerous to health, life or safety, were knowingly false when made,
`
`were fraudulent, and thus entitle the Mays to rescind the Leases. Stated simply, the Defendants
`
`knew that the Mansion was infested with vermin and not only failed to advise the Mays, but they
`
`then lied about it.
`
`7.
`
`The vermin infestation along with the Mansion’s failing systems also resulted in a
`
`revolving door of handymen, pest control service people, repair people and contractors that on an
`
`almost weekly, and sometimes daily, basis interfered with the Mays’ quiet enjoyment of what was
`
`supposed to have been an “extraordinary and truly rare property.” In particular, over the course
`
`many months – and sometimes daily – the Defendants’ “handyman” – Jerek – was dispatched to
`
`investigate water leaks, refrigerator malfunctions, heating malfunctions, air conditioning
`
`malfunctions and to try seal the rodents’ entry points into the Mansion. When he was unable to
`
`accomplish his tasks – a common occurrence – a never ending parade of air conditioning and
`
`heating repair people, appliance repair people and other contractors filled the Mansion, thereby
`
`directly interfering with the Mays’ daily lives.
`
`8.
`
`During one two-week stint, contractors attempted to remediate the infestation by
`
`removing large kitchen appliances and engaging in a patchwork of “band-aide” type repairs that
`
`those same contractors confirmed would likely prove unsuccessful in beating back the vermin.
`
`Indeed, the demolition-type work failed, the Mansion remains infested and the Mays have lived
`
`for months in a manner contrary to the very purpose of the Leases and to any semblance of quiet
`
`enjoyment. For these separate reasons, the Mays are entitled to rescind the Leases, to damages
`
`and/or to a 100% rent abatement.
`
`
`
`3
`
`4 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`9.
`
`Ultimately, after six months of enduring conditions that rendered their purported
`
`“home” unfit for human habitation under any definition, and with no foreseeable end in sight, the
`
`Mays notified the Defendants that they intended to vacate the Mansion on March 5, 2019, which
`
`would have occurred earlier had they been able to retain the services of a moving company on
`
`limited notice. In short, the Mays have been constructively evicted by the severe and unending
`
`rodent infestation along with the unending stream of exterminators, repair persons and contractors
`
`dispatched in an attempt to remediate the scourge and to repair the Mansion’s failed systems.
`
`10.
`
`By this action, the Mays seek in the first instance rescission of the Leases on the
`
`ground that they were fraudulently induced, have been materially breached and have failed their
`
`fundamental purpose. Alternatively, the Mays are entitled to an abatement of 100% of the rent
`
`payments already made and any remaining rent due under the Leases due to Defendants’ repeated
`
`and material breaches of the contractual warranty of habitability and implied warranty of quiet
`
`enjoyment.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`11.
`
`Plaintiffs Darrell and Tara Mays, as of the date of this Complaint, reside at the
`
`Mansion located at 166 East 81st Street and 179 East 80th Street, New York, New York. The Mays
`
`have been constructively evicted and are vacating the Mansion at the earliest moment on which
`
`they were able to secure the services of a moving company.
`
`12.
`
`Upon information and belief Defendants John and Elizabeth Robertshaw (the
`
`“Robertshaw Defendants”) reside at 43 Field Road, Clinton Corners, New York.
`
`13.
`
`Upon information and belief, prior to November 18, 2016, Defendants John and
`
`Elizabeth Robertshaw owned the Mansion located at 166 East 81st Street and 179 East 80th Street,
`
`New York, New York.
`
`
`
`4
`
`5 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`14.
`
`On or about, November 18, 2016, the Robertshaw Defendants transferred the
`
`portion of the Mansion located at 179 East 80th Street to Defendant, John Robertshaw, as Trustee
`
`of the Robertshaw Charitable Remainder Trust, dated June 22, 2016 (the “Trust”).
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`15.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over this matter and all parties as all parties are New
`
`York residents and the subject property is located in New York, New York. For the same reasons,
`
`venue exists in this Court under CPLR §§ 503 and 507.
`
`THE FACTS
`
`The Defendants Attempt to Sell the Mansion but Fail
`
`16.
`
`Upon information and belief, prior to 2017, the Robertshaw Defendants resided in
`
`the Mansion.
`
`17.
`
`The Robertshaw Defendants initially purchased the Mansion’s “Front” portion
`
`located on 166 East 81st Street on or about May 4, 1999.
`
`18.
`
`Thereafter, on or about July 21, 2003, the Robertshaw Defendants purchased the
`
`Mansion’s “Back” portion located on 179 East 80th Street, directly behind the Front portion.
`
`19.
`
`The Robertshaw Defendants thereafter connected the two portions with a multi-
`
`tiered garden, swimming pool and outdoor living space.
`
`20.
`
`As listed, the Mansion’s Front was its four-floor main residence consisting, among
`
`other things, of five bedrooms, four-and-a-half bathrooms, a large “Clive Christian” kitchen with
`
`Viking and SubZero appliances, a master bedroom with an en suite bath, multiple wood-burning
`
`fireplaces and a finished basement.
`
`21.
`
`The Mansion’s Back portion was transformed into a guest house and entertainment
`
`space with a large dining room, yoga studio and roof deck, and was marketed as “fancifully
`
`
`
`5
`
`6 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`renovated to serve as a guesthouse and grand entertaining space.” Indeed, the Back portion was
`
`referred to by Defendants and their agents as the “party house” and, when vacant, was the locations
`
`of parties hosted by the Defendants’ sons.
`
`22.
`
`Both components of the Mansion were said to be packed with amenities, including
`
`central air conditioning, 2000 square feet of outdoor living space, a grilling area and a heated
`
`outdoor pool equipped with Swim Jet.
`
`23.
`
`Upon information and belief, in or about early 2017, the Defendants retained the
`
`Corcoran Group to sell the Mansion.
`
`24.
`
`The Defendants listed the Mansion at $28 million and their agents, the Corcoran
`
`Group, aggressively marketed the Mansion, including in lifestyle and real estate magazines.
`
`25.
`
`For instance, on April 27, 2018, on line magazine, “6sqft,” featured the listing in a
`
`spread entitled “This $28M Upper East Side multi-townhouse-garden-pool megamansion
`
`compound is not like the others.” (A copy of the 6sqft article is attached as Exhibit “B”). The
`
`spread included page-after-page of color photographs of the “townhouse megamansion’s” many
`
`rooms, and declared the Mansion a “stunning double scoop of insane townhouse living.”
`
`26.
`
`Apparently, Defendants never advised 6sqft that the Mansion was infested with
`
`vermin, and no mention of the infestation was made in the multi-page color expose.
`
`27.
`
`Upon information and belief, by mid-2017, the Defendants found themselves
`
`unable to sell the Mansion, and turned to locating a tenant to lease the property.
`
`28.
`
`Based upon information gathered from a nearby doorman, and thus upon
`
`information and belief, the Defendants located a tenant who lived in the Mansion for months, but
`
`then hastily vacated.
`
`
`
`6
`
`7 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`29.
`
`Upon information and belief, in or about February 2018, Defendants – again with
`
`the help of their agent, the Corcoran Group – relisted the Mansion for sale for $24 million.
`
`30.
`
`And again, the Corcoran Group aggressively marketed the property, including
`
`placing an article in the New York Post entitled “Rare double-townhouse compound with pool
`
`lists for $24M.” The article featured a color photograph of the garden connecting the Front and
`
`Back of the Mansion, explained that the Back was “mainly used for entertaining” and quotes from
`
`design and architectural firm, Renovated Home. A copy of the New York Post article is attached
`
`as Exhibit “C”.
`
`31.
`
`Once again, missing from the article Corcoran placed was any mention of the
`
`vermin infestation.
`
`32.
`
`By mid-2018, the Defendants again were unable to sell the Mansion and were
`
`searching for a tenant.
`
`The Mays Are Induced to Rent the Mansion for $43,000 per Month
`
`33.
`
`The Mays hale from Atlanta, Georgia. In 2018, the Mays decided to move to New
`
`York for two years beginning in mid-2018.
`
`34.
`
`The Mays searched for a home large enough for their family, with ample room and
`
`sophistication for entertaining, and, having lived in Georgia, with a substantial outdoor space.
`
`35.
`
`The Mays found the Defendants’ listing through an Internet search, and contacted
`
`the listing agent, the Corcoran Group, to schedule a tour.
`
`36.
`
`The listing described the Mansion “as extraordinary and truly rare property”
`
`“encompassing 10,000 +/- square feet of living” space with the residence in the “Front House” and
`
`a “Back House” that “has been fancifully renovated to serve as a guesthouse and grand entertaining
`
`
`
`7
`
`8 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`space.” Although the listing went into great detail concerning the Mansion’s amenities, nothing
`
`in the listing referenced the severe rodent infestation.
`
`37.
`
`38.
`
`After a tour of the Mansion, the Mays decided to enter a two-year lease.
`
`Consistent with the manner in which the Mansion was marketed and intended for
`
`living, on June 25, 2018, the Defendants provided the Mays with a single written lease agreement
`
`for the entire Mansion (the “Initial Lease”). In the Initial Lease, Defendants represented to the
`
`Mays that the Mansion was “fit for human living and there is no condition dangerous to health,
`
`life and safety.” A copy of the Initial Lease is attached as Exhibit “D”.
`
`39.
`
`Relying upon the Defendants’ representation, the Mays thereafter affixed their
`
`electronic signature to the Initial Lease.
`
`40.
`
`41.
`
`The Defendants’ representation in the Initial Lease was knowingly false.
`
`Having made the representation in the Initial Release, the Defendants were duty-
`
`bound thereafter to provide the Mays with accurate information concerning whether the Mansion
`
`was “fit for human living and there is no condition dangerous to health, life and safety” and, in
`
`particular, whether the Mansion was infested with vermin, in seeking to enter into the ultimate
`
`executed Leases.
`
`42.
`
`Presumably after realizing that the Back House portion of the Mansion is owned by
`
`a Trust, Defendants provided the Mays separate leases for the Front House and the Back House.
`
`Like the prior combined Initial Lease, Defendants represented in each of the separated Leases that
`
`the Mansion was “fit for human living and there is no condition dangerous to health, life and
`
`safety.” Relying upon Defendants’ prior and current representations, the Mays signed the Leases
`
`on or about June 30, 2018 (the “Leases”).
`
`43.
`
`The Defendants’ representations in the Leases were knowingly false.
`
`
`
`8
`
`9 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`44.
`
`45.
`
`The lease term for the Leases commenced on July 15, 2018.
`
`During the period between June 30, 2018 and July 15, 2018, the Mays were advised
`
`that all communications and concerns regarding the Mansion were to be funneled through the
`
`Defendants’ agent and business manager, Claudine Bronte, who had been managing the property.
`
`The Mansion is Infested with Rodents
`
`46.
`
`On July 25, 2018, after the Leases were signed, the Mays moved in to the Mansion
`
`and, as part of their move, the Mays thoroughly cleaned the Mansion with the assistance of their
`
`housekeeper of fifteen years, Ms. Alva.
`
`47.
`
`During the cleaning process, the Mays discovered dozens of mousetraps hidden
`
`under radiators and found bags filled with undeployed mousetraps. They also found mousetraps
`
`in the outdoor space between the Front and Back portions of the Mansion. The existence of the
`
`mousetraps, including the bags of undeployed mousetraps designed for future use, is proof positive
`
`of a known vermin infestation.
`
`48.
`
`In addition, on the very first day, July 25, 2018, the Mays discovered rodents both
`
`in and outside the mansion.
`
`49.
`
`The existence of a severe vermin infestation both in and immediately outside the
`
`Mansion also attracted a swarm of large flies that would enter the Mansion when an exterior door
`
`was opened.
`
`50.
`
`Consistent with the instruction the Defendants gave, the Mays notified Ms. Bronte
`
`that there were “mice in the kitchen trash as well as the trash outside.” The Mays also found rodent
`
`droppings in and around the kitchen, which seemed odd since the Mays were led to believe the
`
`Mansion had not been inhabited for months.
`
`51.
`
`In response, Ms. Bronte advised, without referring any prior tenant:
`
`
`
`9
`
`10 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`John and Lizzie never had a problem with them in the house. And
`there should not be an issue with them as long as you have Ari taking
`out the garbage every day. Maybe call an exterminator?
`
`
`Ms. Bronte’s response was knowingly false, as the Defendants were well-aware that there was a
`
`severe vermin problem “in the house” regardless of the timeliness of garbage disposal. Indeed,
`
`the simple fact that Ms. Bronte acted in an unconcerned manner in suggesting that the Mays call
`
`an exterminator for an infestation that was noticed in less than one day is proof positive the
`
`Defendants were aware of the existing infestation.
`
`52.
`
`On the second day, July 26, 2018, the Mays found vermin droppings in an oven
`
`drip tray that only a day before had been cleaned and sanitized. Again, the Mays contacted Ms.
`
`Bronte asking: “Were u able to get an exterminator. I just found mouse poop in that tray area that
`
`ms alva cleaned where those pans were.”
`
`53. Ms. Bronte responded that she had arranged for the Defendants’ existing
`
`exterminator, “Benny,” of Positive Pets Management, to provide the Mays with exterminating
`
`services to address the vermin problem.
`
`54.
`
`Upon information and belief, Benny knew the mansion well, having provided
`
`exterminating services previously.
`
`55.
`
`Benny cleared away and replaced traps around the Mansion and in the yard, and
`
`installed bags that capture and kill flies in an attempt to address the swarm. And, after
`
`understanding the severe extent of the scourge, Benny the exterminator suggested his services for
`
`the vermin and the flies would be required weekly, and would cost $500 per week.
`
`56.
`
`Even with Benny’s exterminating service, the infestation did not let up. During the
`
`ensuing weeks, the Mays continued to experience both live rodents and dead rodents that required
`
`disposal. Attached as Exhibit “E” is a photograph of one of the many dead rodents discovered
`
`
`
`10
`
`11 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`during the period, this one on August 17, 2018. Attached as Exhibits “F” and “G” are two of the
`
`many live rodents discovered during the period, these on August 18, 2018 and August 19, 2018.
`
`57.
`
`Given the extent of the problem, on August 19, 2018, the Mays again contacted the
`
`Defendants:
`
`Hello there. So there is clearly a mice problem in this house. Even
`after the pest control came out.. it seems the real estate agents and
`the landlords and everyone else forgot to mention this problem to
`us.. and it is clear that this isn’t the first time based on the previous
`amount of traps we’ve come across and the bags of traps they left
`in the closet. But it’s gross and we get that it’s NYC but this isn’t
`right!! I have all of our food protected and contained and we are
`extremely clean.. it doesn’t stop them.
`
`
`
`58. With no end in sight, on August 20, 2018, the Defendants advised the Mays that
`
`they hired a new exterminator named “Gregory,” purportedly from NYC Pest Control. Upon
`
`information and belief, on or about August 22, 2018, Gregory or one of his colleagues examined
`
`the Mansion and confirmed the massive rodent infestation.
`
`59.
`
`On September 8, 2018, Gregory’s colleague, “Desmond,” separately attempted to
`
`treat the Mansion for rodents. The effort failed, and the Mays continued to endure clearing dead
`
`rodents and dodging live rodents in their home.
`
`60.
`
`Due to the continued infestation, on September 10, 2018, the Mays inquired about
`
`how often the pest control technician would come to treat the Mansion. The Defendants refused
`
`to provide a clear answer.
`
`61.
`
`The infestation continued unabated through October despite repeated exterminator
`
`treatments. Throughout the entire period, the Mays continued to observe live rodents, removed
`
`six to eight dead rodents in any given two-week period and were forced to continue clearing rodent
`
`droppings. Attached as Exhibit “H” is a photograph of the Mays’ efforts to clear used traps,
`
`leftover poison and rodent droppings, this occasion being September 10, 2018.
`
`
`
`11
`
`12 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`62.
`
`In addition, when it rained during the period, dead vermin often washed up in the
`
`around the outside of the Mansion and flow to and cluster around storm drains. The swarm of flies
`
`also continues unabated with ample dead rodents on which to feed.
`
`63.
`
`The Mays’ diligent removal of dead rodents was required because they learned
`
`from the experience that decomposing rodents, particularly in summer, caused an unbearable toxic
`
`odor.
`
`64.
`
`Thus, the Mays were prevented from leaving the Mansion for any extended period
`
`because when they did – such as taking a weekend away – they would return to the toxic smell and
`
`find decomposing dead rodents that required removal.
`
`65.
`
`During the same period, Jerek the handyman often entered the Mays’ home and
`
`attempted to patch holes and cracks in an effort to stop the infestation.
`
`66.
`
`Jerek’s efforts proved nothing more than putting a finger in a leaky dyke as the
`
`severe infestation continued unabated with rodents entering the Mansion and leaving droppings
`
`throughout the home, including in drawers that stored dishware, utensils and pots and pans that
`
`were used to cook and eat food.
`
`67.
`
`Although fearing the prospect of dead rodents that were part and parcel of the
`
`continued infestation, the Mays decided to go on vacation from December 16, 2018 to January 5,
`
`2019.
`
`68.
`
`During the vacation, the Mays asked their daughter to retrieve their mail towards
`
`the end of the vacation period.
`
`69.
`
`Upon opening the front door to the Mansion, the Mays’ daughter was met with a
`
`wall of toxic stench caused by decomposing rodents. The Mays’ daughter was able to find two
`
`dead rodents on that occasion, which she understandably needed assistance to remove.
`
`
`
`12
`
`13 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`70.
`
`Upon the Mays’ return from vacation on January 5, 2019, the toxic stench was even
`
`worse. Dead rodents were found throughout the residence, including six in the kitchen under
`
`cabinets and in front of the refrigerator and eight in the basement.
`
`71.
`
`In addition, Desmond the exterminator visited on the same day to treat the Mansion
`
`for vermin, during which he removed scores of additional dead and decomposing rodents from
`
`areas inaccessible to the Mays. Desmond reiterated on that occasion that the Mansion indeed there
`
`remained infested, and that he would need to consult further with Gregory.
`
`72. With no end to the infestation in sight, the Mays contacted a third pest control
`
`service, Orkin.
`
`73.
`
`On January 29, 2019, after over six months living with a rodent infestation that
`
`Defendants failed to abate, Orkin pest control examined the problem and “[i]nspected and treated
`
`all areas to control infestation inside home.”
`
`74.
`
`As part of his inspection, the Orkin serviceman “[s]aw a mouse run through exterior
`
`vent located outside of front office windows to basement” and another live mouse ran across the
`
`floor in front of him while inside the Mansion.
`
`75.
`
`The serviceman also wrote a report of his observations, in which he concluded –
`
`after months of attempts at remediation – there was “live” activity and an “infestation”:
`
`Blizzard of rodents traps placed throughout where no pet or
`children cannot reach. Found and picked up 5 dead mice
`from boiler room. New traps and pest equipment installed
`there. Basement base so many gaps and holes in walls, and
`Sheetrock, so I remember that these gaps must be closed or
`repaired. Crawl space in laundry room is also treated and
`gaps there must also be repaired to prevent pest entry to
`basement from outside. Dumpster door need to be fully
`repaired with door sweep. I recommend that the grill that is
`used to cover fireplace in living room be also used to cover
`vent outside as well. Additional bait stations are needed in
`basement due to heavy rodent activity that was observed.
`
`
`
`13
`
`14 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`Pest clean out should be ongoing and new additional
`resistant temper bait stations must be added (5 bait stations
`in basement, 1 each at the exterior yards and 2 bait stations
`in dumpster area under stairs).
`
`Having received multiple confirmations that the Mansion was infested with
`
`76.
`
`rodents, having to continue dodging live rodents, having to continually dispose dead rodents and
`
`having to confront toxic odors emanating from dead and decomposing rodents, and given the
`
`repeated interruptions to their quiet enjoyment of a Mansion that cost $45,000 per month to rent,
`
`the Orkin infestation report only reconfirmed to the Mays that the Mansion was unfit for human
`
`habitation.
`
`77.
`
`On or about January 29, 2019, the Mays advised the Defendants:
`
`So orkin came a while ago! Found six more mice. Some relatively
`new. This is unacceptable! We really just want to terminate our
`lease. We are just disgusted. We cant leave the house for two days.
`And clearly we can’t even be IN the house! This is an official
`request.
`
`Given that three exterminators were unable to stem the plague, and after stubbornly
`
`78.
`
`contesting their prior knowledge, Defendants were forced to admit that the Mansion was infested
`
`with rodents:
`
`I know Orkin was at the house today, can you please have Tara send
`me the bill so I can reimburse her. Also, our exterminator will be
`out tomorrow to check on everything. . . . The owner of the
`company would like to meet me out there with his guys as well as
`Jerek to see exactly what needs to be done. We are trying to get a
`handle on this as soon as possible.
`
`But even after setting traps throughout the house before the Mays moved in, leaving bags full of
`
`unused traps at the Mansion and knowing that the exterminator they hired suggested weekly pest
`
`control services just to keep up with the scourge, the Defendants remained steadfast: “We were
`
`unaware of the severity of the issue.” The Defendants’ statement was false.
`
`
`
`14
`
`15 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`79.
`
`The next day, January 30, 2019, even more dead rodents were found. One newly-
`
`dead rodent died in the middle of the kitchen, as seen in the photograph attached as Exhibit “I”.
`
`80.
`
`Others were found dead in traps set in a crawl space as seen in the photograph
`
`attached as Exhibit “J”. And one decomposing rodent was also found as seen in the photograph
`
`attached as Exhibit “K”.
`
`81.
`
`On the same day, droppings were again discovered in kitchen drawers containing
`
`cookware and other utensils used by the Mays to eat, as seen in the photograph attached as Exhibit
`
`“L”.
`
`82.
`
`On February 2, 2019, Ms. Bronte and Gregory inspected the mansion, and
`
`attempted to prepare a videotape.
`
`83.
`
`As part of their efforts, Ms. Bronte and Gregory attempted to cover up any further
`
`issues by accusing the Mays’ cleaning lady, Alva, who slept in the finished basement area of
`
`having been the root cause of the infestation.
`
`84. Ms. Bronte demanded that Alva call her directly if she discovered droppings or
`
`vermin sightings, and not advise the Mays.
`
`85.
`
`Beginning on or about February 4, 2019, the Defendants sought to address the
`
`scourge by engaging in substantial demolition-type work requiring the removal of appliances and
`
`other actions. Even with those measures, the Defendants’ contractor made clear that he was not
`
`sure the remedies he was attempting would even work.
`
`86.
`
`Upon removal of one of the appliances, not only were old rodent traps uncovered,
`
`but there was evidence of a shabby prior attempt to seal an entryway into the Mansion from behind
`
`the appliance. The old rodent traps and the prior, but unsuccessful, attempt to seal the kitchen
`
`
`
`15
`
`16 of 25
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/01/2019 03:25 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/01/2019
`
`appliances from vermin constitutes even further proof of Defendants’ knowledge of the vermin
`
`infestation before the Mays were induced to enter the Leases.
`
`87.
`
`The repair persons remained in the Mansion for weeks attempting to remedy the
`
`infestation by removing appliances and conducting other intrusive actions.
`
`88. Meanwhile, Jerek the handyman continued attempting to make his own repairs.
`
`89.
`
`On February 4, 2019, Defendants’ repairman and exterminator agreed, and advised
`
`the Mays, that the repairs Jerek was attempting would not resolve the infestation problem.
`
`90.
`
`On the same day, February 4, 2019, the Mays notified the Defendants of the
`
`opinions of their repairman and exterminator. To date, the Mays have received no response,
`
`intrusive construction-like activity occurred for weeks, and the Mays are s