Home improvement company's counsel seeking to exit breach of contract litigation

By Nicholas Malfitano | Mar 14, 2016

Henry I. Langsam  

PHILADELPHIA – Defense counsel is seeking to leave a breach of contract litigation, citing an “unreasonable financial burden” placed upon them by their client.

Henry I. Langsam filed a motion to withdraw appearance on behalf of himself and Denise A. Kuestner of Langsam Stevens Silver & Hollaender. Langsam noted defendants Kevin Butler and Butler’s Home Improvements, Inc. had failed to pay for services rendered and had not communicated with him or his firm through standard mail, e-mail and telephone.

Langsam said his client had promised to provide payment over the telephone on a number of occasions, but ultimately failed to deliver it – which he said created an unreasonable financial burden on defense counsel.

A hearing in this matter was set for Wednesday in Court chambers, at Philadelphia City Hall.

Dargbeh’s suit said he was the owner of a residential property on the 1700 block of North 61st Street in Philadelphia, and entered into a contract with the defendants for 16 separate line items of home improvement work. Dargbeh said he rendered timely payments to the defendants in excess of $25,000.

Dargbeh alleged the defendants breached their contract by not performing the work in the agreed-upon manner and not conforming to industry standards – specifically, electrical work was “dangerously flawed” and had to be removed, causing collateral damage to the structure.

Dargbeh said the defendants also failed to comply with the City of Philadelphia’s construction regulations, by not obtaining necessary permits required to perform the work and misrepresenting that they did. Further, the defendants were allegedly not present at the home for long periods of time when the work was scheduled to be completed.

Further, Dargbeh said additional assessed charges from the defendants to obtain permits were higher than necessary, and not used for that purpose, leaving the plaintiffs liable to the City for failure to secure those permits.

Also, Butler allegedly received and retained bulk payments to his own name and bank account, instead of his business account. Dargbeh said this action was proof the corporate veil should be pierced, and Butler should be held individually, jointly and severally liable for any and all damages.

In his case, Dargbeh alleged the defendants are liable for breach of contract and violation of Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL).

The plaintiff is seeking treble damages, compensatory and incidental damages, punitive damages, reasonable attorney’s fees, costs and other relief not in excess of $50,000 in this case.

The plaintiff is represented by Predrag Filipovic in Philadelphia.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 141200780

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nickpennrecord@gmail.com

More News

The Record Network