Sandercock Complaint -- Filed, March 2021¶
GUARDRAIL: WHITE -- ORIENTATION ONLY
Navigation and context for the original filed complaint. No legal strategy, no damages calculations, no evidence analysis.
Source Document
Download Original Summons & Complaint (PDF) -- Goodfarb & Sandercock, LLP | Filed March 16, 2021 | Index No. 506171/2021
PART A -- Purpose & Relationship to Current Case¶
This page documents the original Supreme Court complaint filed by Goodfarb & Sandercock, LLP on March 16, 2021. This is the initiating pleading that commenced Christian Gray v. American Package Co., Inc. and Martin Kofman, Index No. 506171/2021.
This page is one of three complaint-related pages in Vol 00:
| Page | Function |
|---|---|
| This page | Fact-only breakdown of the original filed complaint (7 causes, 2 defendants) |
| Ween & Kozek Complaint -- Draft (2025) | Fact-only breakdown of the current draft complaint (8 causes, 1 defendant) |
| Claims & Electables Architecture | Maps causes to binder proof modules; identifies 14 additional electables |
The two filings differ in significant ways:
| Element | Sandercock Filing (2021) | W&K Draft (2025) |
|---|---|---|
| Counsel | Goodfarb & Sandercock, LLP | Ween & Kozek, PLLC |
| Defendants | American Package Co., Inc. AND Martin Kofman | American Package Co., Inc. only |
| Causes of Action | 7 | 8 |
| Focus | Habitability, negligence, harassment, Kofman personal liability | Contract, fraud, insurance proceeds, legalization |
| Status | Filed (NYSCEF) | Pending filing -- under client review |
Understanding both filings gives counsel a complete view of how the case theory has evolved and which claims were originally asserted.
PART B -- Filing Details¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings |
| Index No. | 506171/2021 |
| Filed | March 16, 2021, 11:46 AM |
| Filed With | Kings County Clerk |
| NYSCEF Doc. No. 1 | Summons & Complaint (12 pages) |
| NYSCEF Doc. No. 2 | Exhibit A -- Microbial Survey (Olmsted Environmental Services) |
| NYSCEF Doc. No. 3 | Exhibit B -- Rent Invoice (January 29, 2021, $35,441.24 claimed due) |
The original filed summons and complaint is available for download:
Download Summons & Complaint (PDF)
| Document Detail | Value |
|---|---|
| Filename | 21_03_16_-_CHRISTIAN_GRAY_-_SANDERCOCK_COMPLAINT__FILED_.pdf |
| Page Count | 12 (complaint body) + summons page |
| Exhibits Attached | Exhibit A (Olmsted survey); Exhibit B (rent invoice) |
PART C -- Parties & Representation¶
C.1 Plaintiff¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Name | Christian Gray |
| Residence | 226 Franklin Street a/k/a 97 Green Street, Brooklyn, NY 11222 |
| Unit | G21 |
| Status | Loft Law protected occupant (Article 7-C, Multiple Dwelling Law) |
| Attorneys | Goodfarb & Sandercock, LLP |
| Firm Address | 110 East 59th Street, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022 |
| Phone | (212) 509-0440 |
| Signatory | Margaret B. Sandercock |
C.2 Defendants¶
Defendant 1 -- American Package Co., Inc.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Type | Corporation |
| Role | Owner of the Premises since February 15, 1996 |
| Address | 226 Franklin Street, Brooklyn, NY 11222 |
Defendant 2 -- Martin Kofman
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Type | Natural person |
| Role | Officer of American Package Co., Inc.; generally responsible for managing the Premises |
| Address | 226 Franklin Street, Brooklyn, NY 11222 |
| Basis for Personal Liability | Sixth Cause of Action -- exceeded authority and scope of corporate duties |
Note: The W&K draft complaint (May 2025) drops Kofman as an individual defendant and proceeds against American Package Co., Inc. only.
PART D -- Factual Allegations Summary¶
The complaint's factual allegations span paragraphs 1 through 24, organized under the following headings.
D.1 The Parties and Background (paras. 1--6)¶
The complaint establishes that American Package Co., Inc. has owned the Premises (226 Franklin Street a/k/a 97 Green Street) since February 15, 1996. Martin Kofman is identified as the corporate officer responsible for managing the building. The Premises is an interim multiple dwelling loft building subject to the Loft Law (Article 7-C, MDL). Plaintiff is the protected tenant of Unit G21. Despite being required to obtain a residential certificate of occupancy under MDL Section 284, defendants have not complied.
D.2 The Flood (paras. 7--10)¶
During Columbus Day weekend in October 2019, a pipe burst above Unit G21, causing dirty water several feet deep in the unit. Plaintiff immediately informed the defendant's on-site office. He was told that Mr. Kofman was abroad and no cleanup would occur until his return. Pending that return, plaintiff attempted to salvage personal property and clean up water on his own, using personal protective gear and rented equipment. Much of his personal property had to be discarded.
D.3 The Mold (paras. 11--13)¶
By the time Kofman returned to New York four to six weeks after the flood, the unit smelled of mold, which was also visible to the eye. The complaint alleges this delay was responsible for the deterioration. Despite immediate awareness of the mold, no remediation was conducted from that point through the filing date.
D.4 Damage to the Unit (paras. 14--18)¶
Plaintiff, as a Loft Law tenant, rented the unit as raw space and installed all residential fixtures at his own expense: walls, floors, electrical system, washer/dryer, full kitchen, bathroom, living areas, bedrooms, and two recording studios used personally and professionally. Most of these fixtures needed to be torn out and replaced as beyond repair.
The complaint alleges that Kofman reported the flood to the insurance carrier and falsely represented that the plaintiff's fixtures belonged to the defendants. Defendants collected on this insurance claim but conducted no remediation and disbursed no proceeds to plaintiff.
D.5 Plaintiff's Efforts (paras. 19--20)¶
Plaintiff retained environmental hygienist Ed Olmsted (Olmsted Environmental Services) who inspected the unit on June 15, 2020, took laboratory samples, and concluded that extensive demolition and mold remediation was required. Plaintiff then commenced an HP proceeding (Housing Court) seeking an Order to Correct and a harassment finding under Administrative Code Section 27-2005(d).
D.6 Effects on Plaintiff (paras. 21--24)¶
Plaintiff could not safely live in the unit from the flood through the filing date (18+ months of displacement). He was forced to find and pay for temporary housing, experienced extraordinary food expenses, extraordinary stress (compounded during the pandemic), and lost income due to cleanup efforts, stress, and loss of his recording studios.
PART E -- Causes of Action¶
E.1 Summary Table¶
| # | Cause of Action | Key Basis | Damages Demanded |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Breach of Warranty of Habitability | RPL 235-b | At least $475,000 |
| 2 | Breach of Contract | Landlord obligations | At least $600,000 |
| 3 | Negligence | Failure to maintain + failure to remediate | At least $575,000 |
| 4 | Rent Invalidation / Harassment | Admin. Code 27-2005(d); MDL 284; Loft Board regs | Fines + declaratory relief |
| 5 | Harassment | Admin. Code 27-2005(d); 29 RCNY 2-02 | Maximum fines allowed by law |
| 6 | Piercing Corporate Veil (Kofman) | Exceeded scope of corporate duties | Personal liability on Causes 1, 3, 4, 5 |
| 7 | Attorneys' Fees | Lease para. 19 (reciprocal under RPL 234) | At least $10,000 |
E.2 Cause-by-Cause Detail¶
First Cause of Action -- Breach of Warranty of Habitability (paras. 25--30)
Breach of RPL 235-b arising from the mold condition and protracted failure to remediate. Damages include: alternative housing and food expenses (at least $75,000); personal property and fixtures loss (at least $400,000, itemized as fixtures approximately $250,000, general personal property $9,291.28, books and records $9,092.77, clothes $5,065.78, electronics and audio gear $110,415.76, and IKEA furniture and assembly $17,932.49). Total: at least $475,000 plus interest.
Second Cause of Action -- Breach of Contract (paras. 31--35)
Contractual breach arising from the mold condition and failure to remediate. Includes alternate housing, food, professional fees, lost personal property and fixtures (at least $500,000) plus lost income (at least $100,000). Total: at least $600,000 plus interest.
Third Cause of Action -- Negligence (paras. 36--43)
Failure to use due care in maintaining the Premises (causing the flood and mold) compounded by failure to promptly commence cleanup and remediation. Includes alternate housing (at least $75,000), lost income (at least $100,000), and lost personal property and fixtures (at least $400,000). Total: at least $575,000 plus interest.
Fourth Cause of Action -- Rent Invalidation / Harassment (paras. 44--48)
Plaintiff has been out of possession for 18+ months; unit is uninhabitable; most interior contents and fixtures must be demolished and rebuilt. Additionally, under MDL Section 284 and Chazon v. Maugenest, 19 N.Y.3d 410 (2012), rent is not collectible when the landlord is not in compliance with the statutory code compliance timetable. Plaintiff characterizes receipt of a $35,441.24 rent bill under these circumstances as harassment under Administrative Code Section 27-2005(d). Relief sought: declaratory judgment that rent is not payable, injunction against further violations, and civil penalties.
Fifth Cause of Action -- Harassment (paras. 49--50)
Harassment within the meaning of Administrative Code Section 27-2005(d) and Loft Board regulations (29 RCNY Section 2-02) based on three specific acts: (a) refusal to promptly provide professional flood cleanup; (b) collection of insurance funds for plaintiff's property coupled with failure to spend them on the unit or disburse to plaintiff; and (c) service of a legalization access notice when no legalization could proceed absent mold remediation. The complaint characterizes defendants' agenda as refusing to repair in order to encourage plaintiff to waive his rent-regulated tenancy and vacate.
Sixth Cause of Action -- Piercing the Corporate Veil (paras. 51--54)
Martin Kofman is named personally for exceeding the scope of his duties as a corporate officer with respect to the first, third, fourth, and fifth causes of action. The complaint alleges that both defendants offered buyouts to all tenants to vacate and avoid legalization obligations; that the flood response was in direct retaliation for plaintiff's refusal to accept a buyout; and that defendants withheld remediation with the specific intent to cause plaintiff to vacate and forfeit his statutory tenancy rights.
Binder Cross-Reference -- Kofman Individual Liability
The W&K draft complaint (May 2025) drops Kofman as an individual defendant and proceeds against American Package Co., Inc. only. However, the binder documents extensive additional evidence of Kofman's direct personal involvement across all four fraud tracks developed since this original filing. For the enterprise doctrine framework supporting individual liability, see Yellow Vol 02 (B001 pattern doctrine, B002 enterprise multipliers). For defendant-specific exposure analysis, see Purple Vol 08 settlement playbooks (B003, B006, B012 each contain Kofman sections). For the option to reinstate Kofman as a defendant, see Claims & Electables Architecture, Part C, Electable #14.
Seventh Cause of Action -- Attorneys' Fees (paras. 55--61)
Based on reciprocal lease provisions (paragraph 19 of the most recent lease, made reciprocal under RPL 234). Plaintiff's last lease was in 2007 (Loft Law tenants are statutory tenants and do not receive renewal leases). Fees incurred include legal fees (at least $6,000) and mold expert retention (approximately $4,000 to Ed Olmsted). Total: at least $10,000 plus interest.
PART F -- Relief Requested (WHEREFORE)¶
| Cause | Relief |
|---|---|
| First | Judgment at least $475,000 plus interest |
| Second | Judgment at least $600,000 plus interest |
| Third | Judgment at least $575,000 plus interest |
| Fourth | Fines; declaratory judgment of Loft Law non-compliance and rent invalidity (Exhibit B) |
| Fifth | Harassment finding; maximum fines under Administrative Code and Loft Board regulations |
| Sixth | Personal liability finding against Kofman for Causes 1, 3, 4, and 5 |
| Seventh | Judgment at least $10,000 plus interest |
| General | Costs, disbursements, applicable interest, and further relief as just and proper |
Note on overlapping damages: The first three causes of action involve substantially overlapping damage categories (housing, property loss, income loss). They represent alternative legal theories for recovering from the same underlying harm, not additive totals.
PART G -- Exhibits Filed¶
G.1 Exhibit A -- Microbial Survey (NYSCEF Doc. No. 2)¶
Olmsted Environmental Services microbial survey of 97 Green Street, Unit G21, Brooklyn, NY. The report (dated June 28, 2020, based on June 15, 2020 inspection) documents: wet sand under the raised floor, visible mold on walls and behind removed wainscot, mold growth on the raised wood floor near the bathtub and on the wall shared with the kitchen, and wet wood joists adjacent to the sand. The report concluded that extensive demolition and mold remediation was required.
This survey is also documented at WT-107 (Olmsted Mold Inspection Report) in White Vol 07.
G.2 Exhibit B -- Rent Invoice (NYSCEF Doc. No. 3)¶
American Package Company Inc. rent statement dated January 29, 2021, addressed to Christian Gray, Loft #G21, 97 Green Street, Brooklyn, NY 11222. Total claimed due: $35,441.24. Breakdown: current $2,963.83; 1-30 days past due $2,965.13; 61-90 days past due $2,960.56; over 90 days past due $26,551.72. The invoice covers a period during which the unit was uninhabitable.
PART H -- Binder Cross-References¶
H.1 Key Complaint Allegations and Their Binder Support¶
| Complaint Allegation | Binder Source |
|---|---|
| Flood event (Oct 2019, paras. 7--10) | White Vol 07 Master Timeline (WT-001); BT-100A post-flood documentation |
| Mold conditions (paras. 11--13) | WT-107 (Olmsted report); WT-108 (ALC post-remediation); WT-112 (ALC pre-remediation) |
| Plaintiff's fixtures and recording studios (para. 14) | Blue Vol 05 property damage tabs (BT-101 series) |
| Insurance claim / false representation (paras. 16--18) | WT-103 (insurance declination); WT-104 (pre-insurance meeting); Purple T1 strategy |
| HP proceeding (para. 20) | WT-106 (scope: court-ordered vs. executed); Stipulation of Settlement (HP 6086/2020) |
| Alternative housing costs (paras. 21--22) | Blue Tab 103 (alternative housing costs) |
| Lost income / recording studios (para. 24) | Red Vol 06 (Freeman Street opportunity damages) |
| Rent invalidation / Loft Law (paras. 44--48) | Brown Vol 04 (rent restitution framework) |
| Harassment allegations (paras. 49--50) | Red-OATH Vol 10 (harassment case architecture) |
| Kofman personal liability (paras. 51--54) | Yellow Vol 02 (enterprise doctrine); Purple T2, T4 |
| Olmsted expert retention (para. 60) | WT-107, WT-109, WT-110 (Olmsted reports and responses) |
H.2 Related Pages¶
| Page | Relationship |
|---|---|
| Claims & Electables Architecture | Maps W&K causes to proof modules; identifies 14 additional electables |
| Ween & Kozek Complaint -- Draft (2025) | Fact-only breakdown of the current draft complaint (8 causes) |
| Case at a Glance | Narrative overview of the entire case |
| Facts Overview | Facts-only chronological framework |
| White Vol 07 -- Evidence Repository | Source evidence for all factual allegations |
PART I -- Case Posture Note¶
This complaint was filed in March 2021 by Goodfarb & Sandercock, LLP. Subsequently:
- The HP proceeding (HP 6086/2020) resulted in a Stipulation of Settlement so-ordered December 8, 2020, requiring mold remediation by SERVPRO with assessment by ALC Environmental. Edward Olmsted served as the tenant's independent environmental expert.
- Great American E&S issued a final CGL declination on May 26, 2021, withdrawing defense counsel effective June 25, 2021.
- Attorney Margaret Sandercock's representation concluded and is the subject of a professional malpractice analysis in Orange Vol 12 (B001, D001).
- Current counsel Ween & Kozek, PLLC prepared a revised draft complaint (May 7, 2025) that restructures the causes of action, drops Kofman as an individual defendant, and adds insurance fraud and legalization fraud theories. That draft is documented at Ween & Kozek Complaint -- Draft (2025). For proof mapping and additional electables, see Claims & Electables Architecture.
END -- Sandercock Complaint -- Filed, March 2021 v1.4