PHILADELPHIA – A local real estate company claims to have been the victim of a dirty pool between the City of Philadelphia and a private demolition company, who allegedly colluded to secure a permit to perform demolition work at a former Kingsessing church property behind the plaintiff’s back.
Chester Avenue Holdings Limited Liability Company filed suit on May 14 in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas against the City of Philadelphia, Mangual Demolition, Inc. and Carla Mangual, with all parties based in Philadelphia.
The case was removed by the City to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that same day.
On June 1, 2018, the suit says the plaintiff purchased an abandoned church at 5200 Chester Avenue for $325,000. The property is comprised of a red-roofed sanctuary, a fellowship hall and a rectory.
Almost eight months later, on Jan. 31, 2019, the plaintiff received an initial notice of violation from the City’s Department of Licenses and Inspections. The plaintiff claims the only feature in need of repair was the roof, but the property was otherwise safe and secure.
As it always intended to convert the property into an apartment building, the plaintiff applied for a building permit, to undertake demolition and construction efforts. The suit says the plaintiff hired Mangual Demolition on May 20, 2019 and entered into a general services agreement for the demolition work for a price of $225,000.
This agreement contained clauses for confidentiality as it pertained to Mangual Demolition’s knowledge of the property and to hold the plaintiff harmless for damages or losses of any kind on the part of Mangual Demolition, the suit says.
The Department of Licenses and Inspections issued the building permit to Mangual Demolition for demolition of the building structures on Dec. 4, 2019, authorizing demolition, property-adjacent sidewalk closure and asbestos removal at an estimated cost of $250,000, the suit says.
On Jan. 23, the plaintiff company’s Joseph Solomon spoke with Inspector Anthony DiSabato about obtaining a 60-day extension of the demolition permit to finalize funding and obtain zoning approval for the real estate development project, in order for the aforementioned work to take place, the suit says.
After a six-week wait for the governmental sidewalk closure permit, the plaintiff saw on a City website that the violation on the property was marked closed on March 6 and then, on May 1, the plaintiff’s landscaper told the company that he saw a fence installed around the perimeter of the property, the suit says.
As it turned out, the demolition permit for the plaintiff was withdrawn, the demolition was put out for bid by the City and Mangual Demolition submitted the winning bid for the work at a price of $444,000, and it was Mangual Demolition who erected the fence before performing demolition work on May 11, the suit says.
Subsequent research from the plaintiff showed the Department of Licenses and Inspections issued another demolition permit the previous week on May 4, which called for total demolition of the property and to replace the entire sidewalk, topsoil and seed the entire property and install a six foot-high chain link fence around the property, the suit says.
The plaintiff claims the defendants purposefully concealed all of these developments from it, performed illegal demolition work on the property and did so without also performing the necessary asbestos remediation – a task that will now prove more difficult now that demolition has taken place, the plaintiff says.
For counts of violating 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, violating substantive and procedural due process under the 14th Amendment, violation of the 4th Amendment specific performance, fraud and intentional concealment, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty and trespass/nuisance, the plaintiff is seeking, jointly and severally, an amount in excess of $50,000, plus interest, costs of suit, reasonable attorney’s fees, and other such relief as the Court deems just and appropriate.
The plaintiff is represented by Alan Nochumson and Natalie Klyashtorny of Nochumson, P.C. in Philadelphia.
The defendants are represented by Meghan E. Claiborne of the City Solicitor’s Office and Michael Patrick McIlhinney of Orphanides & Tower, both also in Philadelphia.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-02303
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 200500782
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com