Judge upholds Party Depot verdict
$16.8M ruling against Danbury stands, city ordered to pay interest
DANBURY — Following its recently defeated attempt to set aside the verdict in the multimillion-dollar Party Depot lawsuit, the city’s next move in the drawn-out legal battle over a botched construction project years ago is unclear.
In a late March ruling, Waterbury Judge W. Glenn Pierson upheld a jury’s verdict ordering the city of Danbury and building official Edward Schullery to pay the owners of the local retail party goods store on South Street nearly $17 million in damages after being found liable of negligence at state Superior Court in Waterbury last fall.
Danbury’s deputy corporation counsel, Laszlo Pinter, declined to comment on the city’s plans following the judge’s ruling.
“It’s too soon and, as always is the case, we have to carefully look everything over,” Pinter said Wednesday.
The Oct. 6 verdict followed a five-week jury trial and yearslong litigation stemming from a construction project more than 15 years ago that left Party Depot owners John and Cindy Girolametti with a roughly-30,000-square-foot addition to their business that they haven’t been able to use due to lack of building code compliance.
The Girolamettis’ attorney, Brian Donnell, said his clients — who had the addition built for wholesale display and storage purposes — “have been severely harmed by having to pay all of the mortgage, interest, taxes, maintenance and repairs and other costs for the addition for 16 years while not being able to generate any additional revenues from the project.”
Between 2010 and 2014, the Girolamettis filed several lawsuits against those involved in the construction project —
which court records show took place between April 2007 and November 2008 — including the city of Danbury, which they accused of negligently approving permits and issuing a certificate of occupancy for the project despite the work not being up to code.
Five of the lawsuits, originally filed in state Superior Court in Danbury, were transferred to Waterbury, which handles complex litigation. While one of them ended with a withdrawal of action, the other four were consolidated before finally going to trial this past September.
Following five weeks of evidence and testimony, a jury awarded $16.8 million in damages to the Girolamettis after finding the city of Danbury and Schullery each liable on two counts of reckless disregard for health and safety.
Schullery was one of two city employees who administered the state building code — including through the issuance of building permits, conduction of inspections and review of construction documents regarding the project — on behalf of the city, according to court documents. The other employee, against whom the Girolamettis had also filed a lawsuit, is no longer alive.
Court documents show the city and Schullery were found to have acted with reckless disregard for health and safety in not only “issuing building permits and/or a certificate of occupancy for the construction project,” but “undertaking or conducting inspections and/or failing to conduct inspections.”
The jury also found Test-Con Incorporated — which performed services in connection with the Party Depot construction project, according to the lawsuit — liable on two counts of negligence and ordered the material-testing and engineering firm to pay the Girolamettis $125,000. The Girolamettis had also accused Aschettino Associates of negligence, but the jury ruled in the structural engineering firm’s favor.
Of the $16.8 million awarded to the Girolamettis, nearly $16.6 million was to come from the city, while $250,000 was to be paid by Schullery.
Danbury’s government affairs and communications advisor at the time told Hearst Connecticut Media following the Oct. 6 jury verdict that the city was “examining the strong possibility of an appeal.”
Court records show the city and Schullery filed motions to set aside the verdict and reduce the amount owed a month after the verdict, and Donnell filed a request for post-judgment interest and motion for judgment on the verdict on his clients’ behalf.
Following a January hearing on the post-verdict motions, Judge Pierson issued an order, upholding the jury’s verdict.
In addition to a final judgment of $16.8 million, the court awarded nearly $37,650 in taxable costs, as well as 10-percent post-judgment interest at a rate of 10-percent per year — which Donnell said will “add another approximately $1.7 million a year in interest exposure to the city for all further delays in payment.”
Donnell said it would be risky, but he wouldn’t be surprised if the city appeals the final judgment.
“They’ve said many times that they want to take it to the Connecticut Supreme Court,” he said. “Should the city decide to file an appeal … the Girolamettis will defend fully — and after the appeal is resolved, they will execute against the assets of the city for all of the then owing damages, interest and recoverable costs.”
If that happens, Donnell said the city of Danbury would have to pay even more because the judicial marshal who executes the judgment would be entitled, per statute, to a 15 percent payment on top of the judgment and interest owed to the Girolamettis.
“There’s a major risk for them taking an appeal,” he said, noting that the total amount owed “could easily exceed the $20 million in insurance coverage already paid for by the city, and the city would be directly liable for the deficiency.”