Legal letter regarding premises liability case, January 2012

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

74. Immediately after the Order to Show Cause and the Stop-Work Order were served on

DOB on December 6, 2007, DePietro received a telephone call from an official with

FDNY at One MetroTech Center, Brooklyn, New York. The FDNY official warned

DePietro not to attend the demolition or he would be arrested.

75. Upon information and belief, prior to December 6, 2007, Defendants Ignizio,

Mustaciuolo and Tobacco gleefully notified the media, including the Staten Island

Advance and New York One of the scheduled demolition of the Property.

76. None of the Defendants, including Ignizio, Mustaciuolo and Tobacco, made any effort to

notify DePietro and warn him of the scheduled demolition.

Defendants' Failure to Comply with the Required New York City Notice Laws

77. DePietro received no notice of the proposed demolition, as required by Administrative

Code Sections 26-236 and 26-237. In particular, Administrative Code Section 236(b)

requires personal service if the owner can be found within the city after diligent search.

Under Administrative Code Section 244(d), if the owner cannot be found within the city

after diligent search, proper service includes (a) posting the notice in a conspicuous place

on the premises and (b) depositing a copy of the notice in a post office in the city"'

enclosed in a sealed, postpaid wrapper addressed to the owner at his last known place of

residence.

78. There was no service of notices and orders upon DePietro pursuant to Administrative

Code Section 26-117.

79. The City and its agencies made no diligent search for DePietro in order to serve him with

notice as prescribed by Administrative Code Section 26-236(b).

13

NYC-WTC_000159378