Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 1 Filed 09/09/11 Page 1 of 8

PREET BHARARA

United States Attorney

Southern District of New York

By: BRIAN M. FELDMAN

LIYU

+

- --_.. --.~+

-+~

CARINA H. SCHOENBERGER

Assistant United States Attorneys

86 Chambers Street, 3rd Floor

New York, New York 10007

Tel. Nos. (212) 637-2777,2734,2822

Fax Nos. (212) 637-2686, 2702

Brian.Feldman@usdoj.gov

Li. Yu@usdoj.gov Carina.Schoenbef!~er@u-sa6j.gov .

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------x
UNITEDSTATES OF AMERICA,

ECFCASE

Plaintiff,

COMPLAINT

- against -
LARKSPUR LLC, LARKSPUR MANAGERS, LLC, and LARSEN SHEIN GINSBERG SNYDER LLP,

11 Civ. - - -

Defendants.
-----------------~--------------x
Plaintiff United States of America (the "United States") alleges as follows:

1. This action is brought by the United States to enforce the Fair Housing Act,

Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments

Act of 1988 (the "Fair Housing Act" or the "Act"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619. As set forth in

full below, the United States alleges that the Defendants, the developers and architect of The

Larkspur, a residential apartment complex in Manhattan, have unlawfully discriminated

against persons with disabilities under the Fair Housing Act by failing to design and

construct The Larkspur so as to be accessible to persons with disabilities.

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 1 Filed 09/09/11 Page 2 of 8
Jurisdiction and Venue 2. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1345 and 42 U.S.C. § 3614(a). 3. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (b) and (c) because the claims alleged in this action arose in the Southern District of New York, and concern or otherwise relate to real property located in this District.
The Property 4. The Larkspur is a residential apartment building located at 304 West 117th Street in New York, New York. The complex consists of a tower with elevator access, and contains 115 rental apartment units, a superintendent's apartment, and public and common use areas including laundry facilities and a gym. 5. The rental units at The Larkspur are "dwellings" within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 3602(b), and "dwelling units" within the meaning of24 C.F.R. § 100.21. 6. The Larkspur was designed and constructed for first occupancy after March 13, 1991. All of the rental units are "covered multifamily dwellings" within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(7) and 24 C.F.R. § 100.21. The complex is subject to the accessibility requirements of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C) and 24 C.F.R. § 100.205(a), (c).
The Defendants 7. Larkspur LLC, a New York limited liability company, is the owner, builder and developer of The Larkspur, and the Larkspur Managers, LLC, a New York limited liability company, is the operating manager of Larkspur, LLC, and, in those capacities, designed and constructed the complex.
2

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 1 Filed 09/09/11 Page 3 of 8

i

8. Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP, now dissolved, was, at all relevant

times, a New York registered limited liability partnership that drew the architectural plans

for The Larkspur and, in that capacity, designed and constructed The Larkspur. The

. !

architect of record for The Larkspur was Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP's principal

partner Robert G. Larsen.

Inaccessible Features of The Larkspur

9. The Larkspur, which the Defendants designed and constructed, is

inaccessible to persons with disabilities.

10. For instance, Defendants designed and constructed the following inaccessible

features in The Larkspur:

a. Excessively high thresholds at unit, bathroom, terrace, and kitchen

entrances interfering with accessible routes for persons who use

wheelchairs;

b. Insufficient clear opening width of terrace and closet doors;

c. Insufficient clear floor space within bathrooms for maneuvering by

persons who use wheelchairs;

d. Kitchens lacking sufficient clearance to accommodate persons who

use wheelchairs;

e. Thermostats inaccessible to persons who use wheelchairs;

f.

Kitchen and bathroom electrical outlets inaccessible to persons who

use wheelchairs;

g. Kitchen sinks and ranges not usable by persons who use wheelchairs;

3

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 1 Filed 09/09/11 Page 4 of 8

h. Kitchens lacking sufficient space between appliances and/or

countertops to be usable by persons who use wheelchairs;

.1.

Bathrooms lacking sufficient space between sidewalls and/or fixtures

to be usable by persons who use wheelchairs;

j.

Common area doors requiring excessive force for persons with certain

disabilities;

k.

Common are~ doors closing too quickly for disabled persons to pass

through;

I.

Excessively high thresholds at common area doors interfering with

accessible routes for persons who use wheelchairs;

m. Running slope of building ramp excessively steep to accommodate

persons who use wheelchairs;

n. Ramp handrails excessively high for persons who use wheelchairs;

o. Mailboxes inaccessible to persons who use wheelchairs;

p. Signs for common areas lacking raised-letter Braille;

q. Features within the fitness room and laundry room inaccessible to

persons who use wheelchairs;

r.

Trash chute access doors requiring excessive force for persons with

-----'certain-disabilities.,-;- - - - - - - - _ - - -

s.

Insufficient clear floor space within trash room for maneuvering by

persons who use wheelchairs;

4

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 1 Filed 09/09/11 Page 5 of 8

t.

Insufficient clear floor space within basement storage room for

maneuvering by persons who use wheelchairs;

u. Protrl]qing obje<?!s in common areas, not detectable by canes of

visually impaired persons; and

v. Common area bathrooms lacking sufficient space between sidewalls and/or fixtures to be usable by persons who use wheelch\:l.irs.

II. In designing and constructing The Larkspur in this manner, Defendants failed

to comply with all applicable State and local design and construction provisions, including New York City Local Law 58.
Fair Housing Act Claims

12. Plaintiffre-alleges and incorporates.by reference the allegations set forth in

paragraphs 1-11 above. 13. Defendants violated 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C), and 24 C.F.R. § IOO.205(c),
by failing to design and construct The Larkspur in such a manner that: a. the public use and common use portions of the dwellings are readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities; b. all doors designed to allow passage into and within the dwellings are sufficiently wide to allow passage by persons who use wheelchairs for .. - mobjJity..;.Jln.d..._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

c. all premises within such dwellings contain the following features of adaptive design: i) an accessible route into and through the dwelling;

5

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 1 Filed 09/09/11 Page 6 of 8
ii) light switches, electrical outlets, thermostats, and/or other environmental controls in accessible locations; and
_l!lL_J:J.s1!bJe_kit~h~nsand bathrooms, such that an individual using a wheelchair can maneuver about the space.
14. Defendants, through the actions and conduct referred to in the preceding paragraph, have:
a. Discriminated in the sale or rental of, or otherwise made unavailable or denied, dwellings to buyers or renters because of a disability, in violation of42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(I) and 24 C.F.R. § 100.202(a);
b. Discriminated against persons in the terms, conditions, or privileges of the sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection with a dwelling, because of a disability, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(2) and 24 C.F.R. § 100.202(b); and
c. Failed to design and cOllstruct dwellings in compliance with the accessibility and adaptability features mandated by 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C), and 24 C.F.R. § 100.205.
15. The conduct of Defendants described above constitutes: a. A pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of rights . --granted_b~_theFair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619; and/or b. A denial to a group of persons of rights granted by the Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619, which denial raises an issue of general public importance.
6

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 1 Filed 09/09/11 Page 7 of 8
16. Persons who may have been the victims of Defendants' discriminatory housing practices are aggrieved persons under 42 U.S.C. § 3602(i), and may have suffered injuries as a result of Defendants' conduct described above.
17. Defendants' discriminatory actions and conduct described above were intentional, willful, and taken in disregard for the rights of others.
Prayer for Relief WHEREFORE, the United States prays that the Court enter an order that: 1. Declares that the policies and practices of Defendants, as alleged herein, violate the Fair Housing Act; 2. Enjoins Defendants, their officers, employees, agents, successors, and all other persons in active concert or participation with any of them; from:
a. Failing or refusing to bring the dwelling units and public use and common use areas at The Larkspur into compliance with 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C), and 24 C.F.R. § 100.205;
b. Failing or refusing to take such affirmative steps as may be necessary to restore, as nearly as practicable, persons harmed by Defendants' unlawful practices to the position they would have been in but for the discriminatory conduct;
c. Designing-and/or constructing any covered multifamily dwe11ings in the future that do not contain the accessibility and adaptability features required by 42 U, .S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C), and 24 C.F.R. § 100.205; and
7

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 1 Filed 09/09/11 Page 8 of 8

d. Failing or refusing to conduct a compliance survey at the Larkspur to

determine whether the retrofits ordered in paragraph 2(a) were made properly;

3. Awards appropriate monetary damages, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(c)(l)

and § 3614(d)(l)(B), to each person harmed by Defendants' discriminatory conduct and

practices; and

4. Assesses a civil penalty against each Defendant in the maximum amount

authorized by 42 U.S.C § 3614(d)(1)(C) to vindicate the public interest.

The United States further prays for such additional relief as the interests of justice

may require.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR.
().n.~ ~.ner'l ofth. United State,
r..~

THOMAS E. PEREZ Assistant AttDrney General Civil Rjghm Division

Date: New York, New York
Sept. '"l ,2011

PREET BHARARA
United States Attorney
By: a~A"'" BRIAN M. FELDMAN

LIYU

CARINA H. SCHOENBERGER

Assistant United States Attorneys

86 Chambers Street, 3rd Floor - --------~New_york;-New-y-o-I·Jrt0007-

Tel. Nos. (212) 637-2777, 2734, 2822

Fax Nos. (212) 637-2686, 2702

Brian.Feldman@usdoj.gov

Li. Yu@usdoj.gov

Carina.Schoenberger@usdoj.gov

8

 
 Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-----------------------------------~---------------------wi{
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

III J Filed

I . , .. 10/05/11 Page 1 of ~--.,..... SDr~r USDC

2,8:

'

1 ,_

DOCU1-.1EI"\l

.

' ELEC11tONICALL'Y 'f~~

IIcfI-DD:=AO=TC:E::itF:-=i;;L~:~; D:::.i

.
%Coor

;.

/
r

(

(

.

..
,.-f·

ECFCASE

Plaintiff,
-against­
LARKSPUR, LLC, LARKSPUR MANAGERS LLC, and LARSEN SHEIN GINSBERG SNYDER LLP,

CONSENT DECREE 11 Civ. 6321 (DAB)

Defendants.

---------------------------------------------------------wi{

INTRODUCTION A. Background
This Consent Decree is entered into between the United States of America (the "United States") and defendants Larkspur, LLC and Larkspur Managers LLC (collectively, the "Developer Defendants") .
. WHEREAS, the United States brought this action (the "Action") to enforce provisions of the Fair Housing Act ("FHA"), codified at 42 U,S,C, §§ 3601-3619. Specifically, the United States' complaint in this Action, filed on September 9, 2011, alleges that defendants have engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination, and have denied rights to a group of persons in a manner raising an issue of general public importance, including by failing to design andlor construct The Larkspur ("The Larkspur"), a residential apartment complex located at 304 West 117th Street, New York, New York, with the features of accessible and adaptive design and construction required by the FHA, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C);

lof28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 2 of 28

WHEREAS, the Developer Defendants hereby represent that over 90% of The Larkspur's

116 units are provided to (a) low-income tenants or (b) middle-income tenants under the New

.

,

York City Housing Development Corporation's (HHDC'') New Housing Opportunities Program;

WHEREAS, the Developer Defendants have denied the allegations ofthe United States'

complaint in an answer with cross-claims against defendant Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP

(the "Architect Defendant") and enter into this Consent Decree for settlement purposes only,

without admitting any issue of fact or law;

WHEREAS, The Larkspur is subject to the accessible design and construction

requirements of the FHA, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C);

B. Developer Defendants

WHEREAS, Larkspur, LLC, a New York limited liability company, is the owner and

builder and deVeloper of The Larkspur, and Larkspur Managers LLC, a New York limited

liability company, is 'the operating manager of Larkspur, LLC, and, in those capacities, designed

and constructed The Larkspur;

WHEREAS, the Developer Defendants hereby represent that (a) Larkspur, LLC has not,

directly or indirectly, developed, designed or constructed any other residential buildings with

four or more dwelling units, and one or more elevators, designed and constructed for first

occupancy after March 13, 1991 (HCovered Multifamily Dwellings"), (b) none of Larkspur,

LLC's members has, directly or indirectly, developed, designed or constructed any other

Covered Multifamily Dwellings, and (c) none of the individual members of the members of

Larkspur, LLC owns a majority interest, direct or indirect, in any Covered Multifamily Dwelling

or in any entity that developed, designed or constructed a Covered Multifamily Dwelling;

20f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 3 of 28
C. Relevant Requirements of the Fair'Housing Act WHEREAS, the FHA provides that Covered Multifamily Dwellings must include certain
basic features of accessible and adaptive design to malce such units accessible to or adaptable for use by a person who has or develops a disability, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(f)(3)(C) and (f)(7)(A);
WHEREAS, the accessible and adaptive design provisions of the FHA require that for Covered Multifamily Dwellings: (i) the public use and common use portions of such dwellings are readily accessible to and usable by persons with a disability; (ii) all the doors designed to allow passage into and within all premises within such dwellings are sufficiently wide to allow passage by persons with a disability using wheelchairs; (iii) all premises within such dwellings contain the following features of adaptive design: (I) an accessible route into and through the dwelling; (II) light switches, electrical outlets, thermostats, and other environmental controls in accessible locations; (TIl) reinforcements in bathroom walls to allow later installation of grab bars; and (IV) usable kitchens and bathrooms such that an individual using a wheelchair can maneuver about the space. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C) (these provisions and features are referred to herein as the "Accessible Design Requirements"); D. Alleged Violations at The Larkspur
WHEREAS, The Larkspur is a residential rental apartment building located at 304 West 117th Street in New York, New York. The complex consists of a tower with elevator access, 115 rental apartment units, a superintendent's apartment, and public and common use areas, including a fitness center and laundry facilities;
30f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 4 of 28
WHEREAS, the United States has inspected The Larkspur and specifically identified,
inter alia, the following alleged failures to meet the Accessible Design Requirements at The
Larkspur, which the Developer Defendants deny: Excessively high thresholds at unit, bathroom, terrace, and kitchen entrances 
 interfering with accessible routes for persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Insufficient clear opening width of terrace and closet doors; 
 Insufficient clear floor space within bathrooms for maneuvering by persons who 
 use wheelchairs; 
 Kitchens lacking sufficient clearance to accommodate persons who use 
 wheelchairs; 
 Thermostats inaccessible to persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Kitchen and bathroom electrical outlets inaccessible to persons who use 
 wheelchairs; 
 Kitchen sillies and ranges not usable by persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Kitchens lacking sufficient space between appliances andlor countertops to be 
 usable by persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Bathrooms lacking sufficient space between sidewalls andlor fixtures to be usable 
 by persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Cornmon area doors requiring excessive force for persons with certain disabilities; 
 Common area doors closing too quickly for disabled persons to pass through; 
 Excessively high thresholds at common area doors interfering with accessible 
 routes for persons who use wheelchairs; 

40f28
iiil

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 5 of 28
Running slope of building ramp excessively steep to accommodate persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Ramp handrails excessively high for persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Mailboxes inaccessible to persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Signs for common areas lacking raised-letter Braille; 
 Features within the fitness room and laundry room inaccessible to persons who 
 use wheelchairs; 
 Trash chute access doors requiring excessive force for persons with certain 
 disabilities; 
 Insufficient clear floor space within trash room for maneuvering by persons who 
 use wheelchairs; 
 Insufficient clear floor space within basement storage room for maneuvering by 
 persons who use wheelchairs; 
 Protruding objects in common areas, not detectable by canes of visually impaired 
 persons; and 
 Common area bathrooms lacking sufficient space between sidewalls and/or 
 fixtures to be usable by persons who use wheelchairs. 
 E. Consent of the Parties to Entry of this Order WHEREAS, the United States and the Developer Defendants (collectively, the "parties") agree thatthis Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1345, and 42 U.S.C. § 3614(a). The parties further agree that this controversy should
50f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 6 of 28
be resolved between them without further proceedings and without an evidentiary hearing or a trial;
WHEREAS, the Developer Defendants agree to make the retrofits as set forth herein; and WHEREAS, the parties agree to the entry of this Consent Decree. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
1. GENERAL INJUNCTION 1. The Developer Defendants and each of their officers, employees, agents, successors, and assigns, and all other persons in active concert or participation with them, are enjoined from discriminating on the basis of disability as prohibited by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604.
II. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS / RETROFITS 2. The United States alleges that The Larkspur was not designed or constructed in accordance with the FHA and the Fair Housing Accessibility Guidelines, Design Guidelines for Accessible/Adaptable Dwelling, 56 Fed. Reg. 9472 (1991) (the "Guidelines"), which allegations the Developer Defendants deny. In order to settle this action, the Developer Defendants agree to make the retrofits described in Appendices A and annexed hereto and certain enhanced retrofits in accordance with paragraphs 8-9 below. Modifications to the Public and Common Use Areas 3. The United States alleges that the public and common use areas of The Larkspur do not meet the requirements of the FHA and the Guidelines, which allegations the Developer Defendants deny. In order to settle this action, the Developer Defendants agree to take the actions described below.
60f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 7 of 28
4. No later than 6 months from the entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer
Defendants shall finish the retrofits listed in Appendix A. The Developer Defendants shall
minimize inconvenience to residents in making such retrofits. Modifications to Dwelling Unit Interiors
5. The United States alleges that the dwelling unit interiors of The Larkspur do not meet the requirements of the FHA and the Guidelines, which allegations the Developer Defendants deny. In order to settle this action, the Developer Defendants agree to take the actions described below.
6. The Developer Defendants shall complete each mandatory retrofit listed in Appendix B no later than 6 months from the entry of this Consent Decree or the time specified in Appendix B. The Developer Defendants shall complete each "at request" retrofit listed in Appendix B in any unit no later than the time specified in Appendix B or, if no time is specified, within 45 days of a written request during the term of this Consent Decree.
7. The Developer Defendants shall not be permitted to payor provide other consideration to a resident requesting a retrofit listed in Appendix B in lieu of providing the retrofit. Nor shall the Developer Defendants be obligated to provide a retrofit listed in Appendix ~ on request if the resident seeks other consideration in lieu of the retrofit. In the event that the Developer Defendants believe a resident has requested a retrofit but seeks other consideration in lieu of the retrofit, the Developer Defendants shall notify the United States, identifying the relevant facts. Within 30 days after receiving such notice, the United States shall review the facts and make a determination as to whether the retrofit obligation is waived. If the United States does not object or respond within 30 days, it will not object to the Developer Defendants'
70f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 8 of 28
application to the Court thereafter to relieve the Developer Defendants of the obligation to make
the retrofit. Enhanced Retrofits
8. Within 3 years from the date of the entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall complete retrofits to 5 units at The Larkspur, to be identified in advance to the United States, whose consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, so that the 5 units include all of the following features:
(a) Ovens and ranges with controls located on the front or side of the range, rather than the rear of the range;
(b) Lever door hardware on passage doors throughout the unit; (c) Lever controls on faucets and sinks throughout the unit; (d) Wand shower head on flexible tube, or shower head on height adjustable
rod; (e) Anti-scald valves in showers; (f) Replacement of electric flip switches with rocker switches operable with a
push; (g) Strobe light fire and carbon monoxide alarms; (h) Electric thermostats with large numbers and push buttons to adjust, and
remote thermostat controls; (i) Installation of visual door bell indicator; G) Additional fish-eye or wide view peepholes at 48 inches from floor; (k) Installation of full height mirrors in bathrooms;
80f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 9 of 28
(1) Smooth kick plates on push side of unit entry door so that wheelchair users may use footrests to open unit doors without damaging door surface; and
(m) Full extension drawer slides in kitchen and bath cabinets to allow use of all of the drawer space.
9. In' addition, the Developer Defendants shall, no later than 45 days from a written request of a resident or future resident during the term ofthis Consent Decree, provide any requested combination of the following retrofits to any unit in The Larkspur in which a person
with a "handicap" as defined in the FHA resides or will reside pursuant to a signed lease:
(a) Any of the retrofits listed in paragraph 8(a)-(m); (b) Installation of grab bars surrounding the bathing and toilet areas in
accordance with ANSI §§ 4.16 - 4.24; (c) Taller accessible toilets or raised toilet seat; and (d) Accessible larger cabinet hardware that allows a hand or finger to loop
into a u·shaped pull.
III. NOTICES OF RETROFITS
10. The Developer Defendants shall p~ovide to all residents at The Larkspur no later than 10 days of the entry of this Consent Decree, and to all future residents during the term of this Consent Decree, the following written notices:
(a) Notice to Residents or Prospective Residents of Retrofits to Apartment Units in The Larkspur (Appendix C); and
90f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 10 of 28
(b) Notice to Residents of Retrofits to Public and Common Areas in The Larkspur (Appendix D).
11. Within 10 days after the notices described in paragraph 10 have been distributed, the Developer Defendants shall certify to the United States in writing that such notices have been given and shall specify the manner in which they were distributed. Such certification shall include the names and addresses of the persons to whom the notices were distributed.
IV. PER DIEM FOR DISPLACEMENT 12. In the event that a resident of a unit within The Larkspur scheduled to undergo a modification pursuant to this Consent Decree is prevented by the modification work from using his or her unit for more than 14 consecutive hours, the Developer Defendants shall pay such resident, pro rata, the applicable federal government per diem rate for food and lodging for the local area (as available at www.gsa.gov- click on "per diem rates" under travel) for each day or half-day the resident is unable to use his or her unit. Such payment shall be made prior to the commencement of any retrofit work on the resident's unit, so that the resident can use the money to obtain alternative living accommodations while dislocated.
V. NO ADVERSE ACTION 13. Present and/or future residents may not be charged any additional rent, deposit, fee, or other consideration because of completed, contemplated, or possible retrofits under this Consent Decree. The Developer Defendants shall take no adverse action against any present and/or future resident because such person requests to have his or her apartment, or prospective apartment, modified in accordance with this Consent Decree. Nothing in this Consent Decree
100f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 11 of 28
precludes the Developer Defendants from implementing lawful rent increases or imposing lawful fees for any other reason at The Larkspur.
VI. NEUTRAL INSPECTOR 14. The Developer Defendants shall enter into a contract with a neutral inspector approved by the United States ("Inspector") to conduct on-site inspections of all retrofits performed pursuant to Appendices A and B of this Consent Decree to determine compliance with the specifications in Appendices A and B. The Inspector shall have expertise in the design and construction requirements of the FHA. 15. The Inspector may, upon request of the Developer Defendants, review and comment upon the sufficiency of any proposed repair in writing in advance of any repair by the Developer Defendants, but such review and comment shall be completed no later than 14 days after the request. 16. An initial inspection of The Larkspur shall take place within 45 days of the completion of all of the retrofits set forth in Appendices A and J;!, or as soon thereafter as practicable. 17. For each inspection, the Developer Defendants shall give the United States at least three weeks prior notice of the inspection and shall give the United States an opportunity to have its representative present for the inspection. 18. The Inspector shall set out in writing the results of each inspection, including any deficits, and shall send that report only to the Developer Defendants, the United States, and their respective attorneys.
I1of28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 12 of 28
19. If the inspection indicates that not all of the required retrofits have been made as
specified in the applicable Appendices, the Developer Defendants shall correct any deficiencies
within 60 days and shall pay for another inspection by the same Inspector to certify that the deficiencies have been corrected. This process shall continue until the Inspector certifies that all of the necessary modifications have been made. 'The Developer Defendants shall pay all of the Inspector's reasonable costs associated with these inspections, and such payments shall be made . without regard to the Inspector's findings. Upon reasonable notice, representatives of the United States shall be permitted to inspect the modifications andlor the third-party inspection reports provided for in this Consent Decree, to ensure compliance.
YD. TRANSFER OF INTEREST IN PROPERTIES
20. The sale or transfer of ownership, in whole or in part, of any entity or person's interest(s) in The Larkspur shall not affect the Developer Defendants' continuing obligation to retrofit, andlor conduct or allow inspections of The Larkspur, as specified in this Consent Decree, unless the Developer Defendants have obtained in writing, as a condition of sale or transfer, the purchaser or transferee's commitment to assume such obligations, so that the purchaser or transferee will be bound by the terms of this Consent Decree to make retrofits and allow or conduct inspections as set forth in this Consent Decree, and will be subject to the jurisdiction of this Court.
21. Should an owner of The Larkspur decide to sell or transfer any ownership interest in The Larkspur, in whole or in part, or any portion thereof, prior to the completion of the retrofits specified in this Consent Decree's Appendices describing the retrofits for The Larkspur, the Developer Defendants will at least 30 days prior to completion of the sale or transfer: (a)
120f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 13 of 28
provide each prospective buyer with a copy of this Consent Decree and written notice that The Larkspur is subject to this Consent Decree, including specifically the Developer Defendants' obligations to either (i) complete required retrofit work and allow inspections as set forth herein, or (ii) assign such obligations to the purchaser or transferee by obtaining the purchaser or transferee's commitment to be bound by this Order, subject to the jurisdiction of this Court; and (b) provide to the United States, by facsimile and first-class mail, written notice of the owner's intent to sell or transfer ownership,along with a copy of the notice sent to each buyer, and each buyer's name, address and telephone number.
VIII. NON·DISCRIMINATION IN OTHER DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 22. For the duration of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall maintain, and provide to the United States upon request, the following information and statements regarding any Covered Multifamily Dwellings intended to be purchased, developed, built, designed, and/or engineered in whole or in part, by anyone of them or by any entities in which anyone of them has a position of control as an officer, director, member, or manager, or has a ten-percent (10%) or larger ownership share:
the name and address ofthe project; a description of the project and the individual units; the name, address, and telephone number of the civil engineer(s) involved with the project; a statement from the civil engineer(s) involved with the project acknowledging and describing hislher knowledge of and training in the requirements of the Fair Housing Act and in the field of accessible site design, and certifying that helshe
13 of28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 14 of 28
has reviewed the engineering documents for the project and that the design
specifications therein fully comply with the requirements of the Fair Housing Act
and the Guidelines; the name, address and telephone number of the architect(s) who are employed or retained by any Developer Defendant and are involved with the project; a statement from all architect(s) who are employed or retained by any Developer Defendant and are involved with the project, acknowledging and describing
his/her knowledge of and training in the requirements of the Fair Ho~sing Act and
the Guidelines, and in the field of accessible site design, and certifying that he/she has reviewed the architectural plans for the project and that the design specifi~ations therein fully comply with the requirements of the Fair Housing Act and the Guidelines. 23. If the engineering documents or architectural plans referred to in paragraph 22 above are revised, and the revisions could have any impact on whether the dwellings or complex comply with the Fair Housing Act and/or the Guidelines, the Developer Defendants shall obtain, maintain, and provide to the United States upon request, a statement from the site engineer(s) or architect(s) who are employed or retained by any Developer Defendant and are involved with the project, as applicable, that all specifications in the revised engineering documents or architectural plans, as pertinent, comply with the requirements of the Fair Housing Act and the Guidelines. 24. The Developer Defendants will make all new construction fully compliant with the Accessible Design Requirements, the FHA Guidelines, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Standards. During the term of this
140f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 15 of 28
Consent Decree, upon reasonable notice, the United States will be permitted full access to such
properties to inspect for compliance with such standards, rules, and laws. IX. PAYMENTS TO AGGRlEVED PERSONS
25. Within 30 days of entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall deposit in an interest-bearing account the total sum of SIXTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($60,000) for the purpose of compensating any aggrieved persons who have suffered as a result of the alleged discriminatory housing practices regarding The Larkspur. This deposited money and any accrued interest shall be referred to as the "Settlement Fund."
26. Within 15 days of the entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall publish the Notice to Potential Victims of Housing Discrimination ("Notice") at Appendix
& informing readers of the availability of compensatory funds. The Notice shall be no smaller
than three columns by six inches and shall be published on three occasions in each of the following newspapers: the Harlem News, the Manhattan Times and the New York Amsterdam News, and on two occasions in the New York Times. The publication dates in each newspaper shall be separated from one another by 21 days, and at least one of the publication dates shall be on a Sunday if the newspaper publishes a Sunday edition. Within 10 days of each publication date, the Developer Defendants shall provide the newspapers containing the Notice to the United States.
27. Within 15 days of entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall place, on any website used by the Developer Defendants for advertising, a link to an electronic version of the Notice in an Adobe Acrobat Portable Document Format ("PDF"). The link should state "Notice to Potential Victims of Housing Discrimination," and should appear on the upper
150f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 16 of 28
half of the website, in a red font, in a font size no smaller than the font size for subtitles or
notices on such website.
28. Within 15 days of the entry ofthis Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants
shall send a copy of the Notice to each of the following organizations:
Brooklyn Center for Independence of the Disabled 
 27 Smith Street, Suite 200 
 Brooklyn, New York 11201; 

Bronx Independent Living Services 
 4419 Third Avenue, Suite 2C 
 Bronx, New York 10457; 

Center for Independence of the Disabled, NY 
 841 Broadway, #301 
 New York, New York 10003; 

Disability Law Center at New York Lawyers for the Public Interest 
 151 W. 30th Street, 11 th Floor 
 New York, New York 10001; 

Disability Rights Advocates 
 1560 Broadway, 10th Floor 
 New York, New York 10036; 

Fair Housing Justice Center 
 5 Hanover Square, 17th Floor 
 New York, New York 10004; 

Harlem Independent Living Center 
 289 St. Nicholas Avenue, Suite 21, Lower Level 
 New York, New York 10027; 

The Legal Aid Society of New York 
 199 Water Street 
 New York, New York 10038; 

Legal Services NYC 
 350 Broadway, Sixth Floor 
 New York, New York 10016; 

160f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 17 of 28
MFY Legal Services, Inc. 
 299 Broadway 
 New York, New York 10007; and 
 United Spinal Association 
 75-20 Astoria Blvd 
 Jackson Heights, New York 11370. 
 29. Within 30 days of the entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall send, by first-class mail, postage pre-paid, a copy of the Notice to each past or present resident at The Larkspur. For past residents, the Developer Defendants will have complied with the requirements of this paragraph by mailing such notice to the forwarding address, if any, provided by the fonner resident at the time the fonner resident moved out of The Larkspur. Within 60 days of entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall provide the United States with proof that the Notices have been sent. 30. The United States may make its own efforts to locate and provide notice to . potential aggrieved persons. 31. The Developer Defendants shall permit the United States, upon reasonable notice, to review any records that may reasonably facilitate its efforts to locate and provide notice to potential aggrieved persons and its determinations regarding the claims of alleged aggrieved persons. 32. The United States shall investigate the claims of allegedly aggrieved persons and shall detennine which persons are aggrieved and an appropriate amount of damages that should be paid to any such person. The United States will give the Developer Defendants written notice of each of its determinations, and the factual basis thereof, to gether with a copy of a sworn declaration from each aggrieved person setting forth the factual basis of the claim.
170f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 18 of 28
33. If the Developer Defendants dispute the United States' detennination of an alleged grievance or the amount of a payment to an aggrieved person, the Developer Defendants shall, within 14 days of receiving notice of a detennination (a "Detennination") from the United States, provide a written objection to the United States, along with any infonnation or documents that they believe may refute the aggrieved person's claim. The United States shall give due consideration to any objections it receives from the Developer Defendants and shall, following any objection, give the Developer Defendants written notice ofits reconsidered detennination (a "Reconsidered Determination"), setting forth the aggrieved person and the amount that the aggrieved person should be paid. If the Developer Defendants dispute the Reconsidered Determination, the Developer Defendants shall file an objection with the Court, which may sustain or overrule the objection.
34. The Developer Defendants shall, no later than 30 days after receiving a Determination to which no objection has been made, or 10 days after receiving a Reconsidered Detennination to which no objection has been filed with the Court, or 10 days after any decision by the Court overruling a filed objection, whichever is earliest, deliver to the United States checks payable to aggrieved persons in the amounts identified by the United States or allowed by the Court. In no event shall the aggregate of all such checks exceed the amount of the Settlement Fund, including accrued interest. No aggrieved person shall be paid until he/she has executed and delivered to the United States and the Developer Defendants duplicate originals of the release at Appendix F.
35. No adverse action shall be taken by the Developer Defendants against any person because such person malces or seeks to malce a claim under Section IX of this Consent Decree.
180f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 19 of 28
36. In the event that less than the total amount of the Settlement Fund, including accrued interest, is distributed to aggrieved persons, and after the United States determines that no further aggrieved persons will be identified, the remainder plus FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000) shall be distributed to a qualified organization(s), mutually agreed upon by the United States and the Developer Defendants, subject to the approval of the Court, for the purpose of conducting fair housing enforcement-related activities in New York City.
X. CMLPENALTY 37. . Within 30 days of the date of the entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall pay a civil penalty ofTHIRTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($35,000) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(I)(C) to vindicate the public interest. Said sum shall be paid by SUbmitting a check made payable to the "United States of America" to the United States.
XI. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM 38. Within 30 days of the entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall provide a copy of this Consent Decree to all their employees involved in the design or
construction of The Larkspur, as well as to all other entities (e.g., firms) that were involved in the·
design or construction of The Larkspur as the Developer Defendants' agent, and secure the signed statement from each employee and other entity acknowledging that he, she, or it has received and read the Consent Decree, and has had an opportunity to have questions about the Consent Decree answered. This statement shall be substantially similar to the form of Appendix G.
39. During the term of this Consent Decree, any new employee of a Developer Defendant who will be involved in the design or constnlction of Covered Multifamily Dwellings,
190f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 20 of 28
as well as any entities (e.g., firms) acting as a Developer Defendant's agent that will be involved
in the design and construction of Covered Multifamily Dwellings, shall, within 30 days after the date he or she commences an agency or employment relationship with any Developer Defendant, be given a copy of this Consent Decree by such Developer Defendant, and such Developer Defendant shall require each such new employee or entity to sign a statement, acknowledging that he, she, or it has received and read the Consent Decree, and has had an opportunity to have questions about the Consent Decree answered. This statement shall be substantially similar to the form of Agpendix O.
40. Within 30 days of the entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall provide a copy of this Consent Decree to all their employees involved in rental of units at The Larkspur and/or the provision of services to residents at The Larkspur, and the Managing Agent of The Larkspur, and secure the signed statement from each employee and the Managing Agent acknowledging that he, she, or it has received and read the Consent Decree, and has had an opportunity to have questions about the Consent Decree answered. This statement shall be substantially similar to the form of Appendix O.
41. During the term of this Consent Decree any new employee of a Developer Defendant who will be involved in the renting of units at The Larkspur, and/or the provision of services to residents at The Larkspur, and the Managing Agent of The Larkspur shall, within 30 days after the date he, she, or it commences an agency or employment relationship with any of the Developer Defendants, be given a copy of this Consent Decree by such Defendant, and such . Defendant shall require each such new agent or employee to sign a statement, acknowledging that he or she has received and read the Consent Decree, and has had an opportunity to have
200f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 21 of 28
questions about the Consent Decree answered. This statement shall be substantially similar to the form of Appendix G.
42. In lieu of providing employees, entities or the agents listed in paragraphs 38
through 41 with copies of the Consent Decree as required therein, a Developer Defendant may provide employees or agents with a summary of the Consent Decree, designed to provide personnel with information relevant to their positions. A Developer Defendant may only provide such summaries in lieu of copies of the Consent Decree with the United States' advance written approval of the form and content of any proposed summary.
43. Each Developer Defendant shall also ensure that it and its employees, as well as any entities (e.g., firms) acting as a Developer Defendant's agent, who have direct management duties for the design and/or construction of Covered Multifamily Dwellings have a copy of, are familiar with, and personally have reviewed, the Fair Housing Accessibility Guidelines, 56 Fed. Reg. 9472 (1991), and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Fair Housing Act Design Manual, A Manual to Assist Builders in Meeting the Accessibility Requirements of the Fair Housing Act (August 1996, Rev. April 1998). All employees of the Developer Defendants whose duties, in whole or in part, involve the management, sale and/or rental of multifamily dwellings at issue in this case, including the Managing Agent of The Larkspur, shall be informed of those portions of the Fair Housing Act that relate to accessibility requirements, reasonable accommodations and reasonable modifications.
44. Within 90 days of the date of entry of this Consent Decree, all employees of the Developer Defendants whose duties, in whole or in part, involve or will involve supervision over the development, design and/or construction of Covered Multifamily Dwellings, as well as any
21 of28
I

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 22 of 28
entities (e.g., firms) acting as a Developer Defendant's agent that will be involved in the design and construction of Covered Multifamily Dwellings, shall undergo training on the design and construction requirements of the Fair Housing Act. The training shall be conducted by a qualified third-party individual, not associated with any Developer Defendant or its counsel, and approved by the Department of Justice, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed; and any expenses associated with this training shall be borne by Developer Defendants. The Developer Defendants shall provide to the United States, 30 days before the training, the name(s), addressees) and telephone number(s) of the trainer(s); and copies of the training outlines and any materials to be distributed by the trainers. The Developer Defendants shall provide to the United States, 30 days after the training, certifications executed by all the Developer Defendants and covered employees and entities confirming their attendance, in a form substantially equivalent to Appendix H.
XII. NOTICE OF THE DEVELOPER DEFENDANTS' NON-DISCRIMINATION 
 POLICY AND THE DEVELOPER DEFENDANTS' OUTREACH EFFORTS 
 45. Within 10 days of the date of entry ofthis Consent Decree, the Developer
Defendants shall post and prominently display in the sales or rental offices of all Covered Multifamily Dwellings owned or operated by them a sign no smaller than 10 by 14 inches
indicating that all dwellings are available for rental on a nondiscriminatory basis. A poster that
comports with 24 C.F.R. Part 110 will satisfy this requirement. 46. For the duration of this Consent Decree, in all future advertising in newspapers
and electronic media, and on pamphlets, brochures and other promotional literature regarding The Larkspur or any new Covered Multifamily Dwelling that any Developer Defendant may develop or construct, the Developer Defendant shall place, in a conspicuous location, and a
220f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 23 of 28
statement that the dwelling units include features for persons with disabilities required by the federal Fair Housing Act.
47, For the duration of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants will
affirmatively market The Larkspur to persons with disabilities, Such affirmative marketing will include: the distribution of marketing materials regarding accommodation of residents with disabilities to the general public and to governmental and charitable groups that assist persons with disabilities; and the provision of available apartment listings to Disabled American Veterans, the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, the Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities, the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, and the New York City Housing Development Corporation for publication on each group's respective website.
XIII. NOTIFICATION AND DOCUMENT RETENTION REQUIREMENTS 48. Within 180 days after the date of entry of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall submit to the United States an initial report regarding the signed statements of the Developer Defendants' employees and entities who or that have completed the training
program specified in paragraph 44 of this Consent Decree, Thereafter, during the term of this
Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall, on the anniversary of the entry of this Consent Decree, submit to the United States a report containing the signed statements of new employees or entities that, in accordance with paragraph 39 of this Consent Decree, they have received and read the Consent Decree, and had an opportunity to have questions about the Consent Decree answered. The final report shall be due 60 days prior to the anniversary of the entry of this Consent Decree.
23 of28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 24 of 28
49. For the duration ofthis Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants shall advise
the United States in writing within 15 days of receipt of any written administrative or legal fair
housing complaint regarding any property owned, managed, and/or designed or constructed by them, or against any employees of the Developer Defendants working at or for any such property, or against the Managing Agent of such property, regarding discrimination on the basis of disability in housing. Upon reasonable notice, the Developer Defendants shall also provide the United States all information in their possession it may request concerning any such complaint. The Developer Defendants shall also advise counsel for the United States, in writing, within 15 days of the resolution of any complaint.
50. For the term of this Consent Decree, the Developer Defendants are required to preserve all records related to this Consent Decree, for The Larkspur, and any other Covered Multifamily Dwellings designed, constructed, owned, operated, or acquired by them during the duration of this Consent Decree. Upon reasonable notice to the Developer Defendants, representatives of the United States shall be permitted to inspect and copy any records of the Developer Defendants or inspect any developments or residential units under the Developer Defendants' control bearing on compliance with this Consent Decree at any and all reasonable times, provided, however, that the United States shall endeavor to minimize any inconvenience to the Developer Defendants and their tenants from such inspections.
XIV. LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM COMPLIANCE 51. The Developer Defendants are hereby notified that, in the event that the Developer Defendants fail to comply with any of the terms of this Consent Decree and the United States obtains an order establishing such noncompliance, the United States may take any
240f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 25 of 28
appropriate action, including but not limited to notifying the appropriate state housing finance agency of the violation. See 26 U.S.C. § 42(m)(1)(B)(iii).
XV. RESOLUTION, WAIVER, DURATION OF CONSENT DECREE AND TERMINATION OF LEGAL ACTION
52. This Consent Decree shall remain in effect for three years following entry of this Consent Decree by the Court. By consenting to entry of this Consent Decree, the parties agree that in the event that the Developer Defendants engage in any future ~onduct occurring after entry of this Consent Decree that is determined by a Court to be a violation of the Fair Housing Act, such conduct shall constitute a "subsequent violation" pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(1 )(C)(ii).
53. The Complaint in this Action is hereby dismissed without prejudice to reinstatement in accordance with the next paragraph.
54. The Complaint in this Action shall be reinstated at any time during the duration of this Consent Decree against any Developer Defendant that the Court determines has failed to perform, in a timely manner, any act required by this Consent Decree or has otherwise failed to act in conformance with any provision of this Consent Decree.
55. This Consent Decree hereby releases the Developer Defendants, collectively and individually, and each of their officers, employees, agents, directors, managers, partners, members, shareholders, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, related parties, successors, and assigns and all other persons acting in concert or participation with them, from claims by the United States regarding alleged failures, as of the date of entry of this Consent Decree, to design and construct The Larkspur pursuant to the FHA, including all of the claims alleged in the Action, except for matters referred by the Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to
250f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 26 of 28
42 U.S.C. § 3612(0). Provided, however, that the Developer Defendants are not released from any claims by the United States concerning any Covered Multifamily Dwellings other than The Larkspur, including any claims regarding previously designed and constructed dwellings and any claims regarding Current or future designed and constructed dwellings. Nor are the Developer Defendants released from any claims regarding FHA violations at The Larkspur other than failures to design and construct that property as of the Effective Date ofthis Consent Decree as required by the FHA.
56. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for the duration of this Consent Decree to enforce the terms of the Consent Decree. The United States may move the Court to extend the duration of the Consent Decree in the interests ofjustice. The Developer Defendants reserve their right to object to any such extension and to oppose any such motion.
57. The United States and the Developer Defendants shall endeavor, in good faith, to resolve informally any differences regarding interpretation of and compliance with this Consent Decree prior to bringing such matters to the Court for resolution. However, in the event of a failure by the Developer Defendants to perform, in a timely manner, any act required by this Consent Decree or otherwise for their failure to act in conformance with any provision thereof, the United States may move this Court to impose any remedy authorized by law or equity, including, but not limited to, an order requiring performance of such act or deeming such act to have been performed, and an award of any damages, costs, and reasonable attorney's fees which may have been occasioned by the violation or failure to perform.
58. Upon the expiration ofthe Consent Decree, the Complaint in this Action shall be dismissed with prejudice as to the Developer Defendants.
260f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 27 of 28
XVI. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE 59. Any time limits for performance imposed by this Consent Decree may be extended by the mutual written agreement of the United States and the relevant Developer Defendants.
XVII. COSTS OF LITIGATION 60. Each party to this litigation will bear its own costs and attorney's fees associated with this litigation.
XVIII. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 61. All obligations agreed to by the Developer Defendants in this Consent Decree are without prejudice to the Developer Defendants' claims, rights and remedies against the Architect Defendant and/or any other person or entity, including, without limitation, claims, rights and remedies concerning negligence, malpractice, contribution, indemnity, and successor liability, all of which claims, rights and remedies are expressly reserved. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be used as evidence ofthe liability, or lack thereof, of the Developer Defendants or any person or entity not a party to the Consent Decree.
XIX. NOTICES TO PARTIES 62. All notices under or relating to this Consent Decree shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when sent as follows: If to the United States: by first-class mail addressed to Chief, Civil Rights Unit, Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District ofNew York, 86 Chambers Street, Third Floor, New York, New York 10007, and by fax to (212) 637-2717.
270f28

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 4 Filed 10/05/11 Page 28 of 28
Ii

If to the Developer Defendants: by first-class mail addressed to Lemle & Wolff, Inc., Managing Agent for The Larkspur, 5925 Broadway, Bronx, New York 10463, and by email to kroberts@cozen.com and j dichiarag@aol.com.
The undersigned apply for and consent to the entry of this Consent Decree:

For the United States:

THOMAS E. PEREZ Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division

PREET BHARARA United States Attorney

BY:~ 


BRIAN M. FELDMAN

LlYU

.

CARINA H. SCHOENBERGER

Assistant United States Attorneys

86' Chambers Street, 3rd Floor

New York, New York 10007

Tel. Nos. (212) 637-2777, 2734, 2822

Fax. No. (212) 637-2686, 2702

Brian.Feldman@usdoj.gov

Li.Yu@usdoj.gov

Carina. Schoenberger@usdoj.gov

For Defendants Larkspur, LLC and Larkspur Managers LLC:

SO ORDERED: UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGIE
I~S It
280f28

 
 Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20
. UNITED STATES DIS1RICTCOURT 
 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
.. ---------------------------------~- --.------------------}{
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Filed 01/26/12 Page 1 of 17

USOC'SDNY

,

DOct~nli""~

i

.ELECfRONIC.ALLY 'FILEb~

DOC II:
DATliFlLBD: '0\ '2..6

I

i

.~ [~~

\'2-

i

.. , .

ECFCASE

, Plaintiff,
-against­
LARKSPUR, LLC, LARKSPUR MANAGERS LLC, and LARSEN SHEIN GINSBERG SNYDER LLP,

CONSENT DECREE 11 Civ. 6321 (DAB)

Defendants.

----------------------------------------------------------}(

INTRODUCTION

A. Background

This Consent Decree is entered into between the United States of America (the "United

States") and Defendant Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP.

WHEREAS, the United States brought this action (the "Action") to enforce provisions of

the Fair Housing Act ("FHA"), codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619. Specifically, the United

States' complaint in this Action, filed on September 14,2011, alleges that defendants have

. I

.engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination, and have denied rights to a group of persons in

a manner raising an issue of general public importance, by failing to design and/or construct The
Larkspur ("The Larkspur'~, a residential apartment complex located at 304 W~st 1171h Street,

New York, New York, with the features of accessible and adaptive design and construction

required by the FHA, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C);

10f15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 2 of 17 I,
, ;
WHEREAS, Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder'LLP denies the allegations of the United States' complaint and enters into this Consent Decree for settlement purposes only, without admittfng any issue of fact or law or any liability;
WHEREAS, The Larkspur is subject to the accessible desi~ and construction requirements of the FHA, 42 U.s.C.,§ 3604(f)(3)(C); B. Arcbitect Defendant
WHEREAS, Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP was, at all relevant times, a New York registered limited liability partnership that prepared the architectural plans for The Larkspur and, in that capacity, designed The Larkspur, but is now dissolved and no longer conducts business;
WHEREAS, Robert G. Larsen ("Larsen"), was, at all relevant times, the architect of record for The Larkspur and a principal partner of Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP;
WHEREAS, the term IIArchitect Defendant" as' used in this Consent Decree refers to
Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP and its former employee and principal partner Larsen; C. Relevant Requirements of tbe Fair Housing Act
WHEREAS, the FHA provides' that Covered Multifamily Dwellings must include certain basic features of accessible and adaptive design to make such units accessible to or adaptable for use by a person who has or develops a disability, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(f)(3)(C) and (f)(7)(A);
WHEREAS, the accessible and adaptive design provisions of the FHA require that for Covered Multifamily Dwellings: (i) the public use and common use portions of such dwellings are readily accessible to and usable by persons with a disability; (ii) all the doors designed to allow passage into and within all premises within such dwellings are sufficiently wide to allow passage by persons using wheelchairs; (iii) all prcmiscs within such dwellings contain the
20fl5

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 3 of 17

following features of adaptive design: (1) an accessible route into and through the dwelling; (II)

light switches, electrical outlets, thermostats, and other environmental controls in accessible
. locations; (TIl) reinforcements in bathroom walls to allow later installation of grab bars;' and OV)

usable ldtchens and bathrooms such that an individual using a wheelchair can maneuver about

the space. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(C) (these provisions and features are referred to herein as the

"Accessible Design Requirements");

D. Alleged Violations atThe LarkspuI:

WHEREAS, The Larkspur is a residential rental apartment building located at 304 West

117th Street in New York, New York. The complex consists ofa tower with elevator access,

115 rental apartment units, a superintendent's apartment, and public and common use areas,

including a fitness center and laundry facilities;

WHEREAS, the United States has inspected The Larkspur and specifically identified, 


inter alia, the following alleged failures to meet the Accessible Design Requirements at The 


~

,

.

Larkspur, which the Architect Defendant denies:

• Excessively high thresholds at unit, bathroom, terrace, and kitCihen entrances

interfering with accessible routes for persons in wheelchairs;

• Insufficient clear opening width ofterrace and closet doors;

e Insufficient clear floor space within bathrooms for maneuvering by persons in

wheelchairs;

• Kitchens lacking sufficient clearance to accommodate persons in wheelchairs;

• Thermostats inaccessible to persons in wheelchairs;

• Kitchen and bathroom electrical outlets inaccessible to persons in wheelchairs;

3 of 15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 4 of 17
I'
t
• Kitchen sinks and ranges not usable by persons in wheelchairs; • Kitchens lacking sufficient space between appliances andJor countertops to be
usable by persons in wheelchairs; • Bathrooms lacldng sufficient space between sidewalls andJor fixtures to be usable
by persons in wheelchairs; • Common area doors requiring excessive force for persons with certain disabilities; • Common area doors closing too quickly for disabled persons to pass through; .• Excessively high thresholds at common area doors interfering with accessible
routes for persons in wheelchairs; • Running slope of building ramp excessively steep to accommodate persons in
wheelchairs; • Ramp handrails excessively high for persons in wheelchairs; • Mailboxes inaccessible to persons in wheelchairs; • Signs for common areas lacldng raised-letter Braille; • Features within the fitness room and laundry room inaccessible to persons in
wheelchairs; • Trash chute access doors requiring excessive force for persons with certain
disabilities; • Insufficient clear floor space within trash room for maneuvering by persons in
wheelchairs; • Insufficient clear floor space within basement storage room for maneuvering by
persons in wheelchairs;
4ofl5

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 5 of 17
• Protruding objects in common areas, not detectable by canes of visually impaired persons; and
• Common ai'~a bathrooms lacking sufficient space between sidewalls and/or fixtures to be usable by persons in wheelchairs.
E. Consent of the Parties to Entry oftbis Order WHEREAS, the United States and the Architect Defendant (collectively, the "Parties")
agree that this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter ofthis case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1345, and 42 U.S.C. § 3614(a). The Parties further agree that this controversy should be resolved without further proceedings and without an evidentiary hearing or a trial; and
WHEREAS, the Parties agree to the entry ofthis Consent Decree; It is bereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
I. GENERAL INJUNCTION 1. The Architect Defendant, and each of its officers, employees, agents, successors, and assigns, if any, and all other persons in active concert or participation with them, are enjoined from discriminating on the basis of disability as prohibited by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604.
n. NON-DISCRIMINATION IN OTHER DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
2. For the duration of this Consent Decree, the Architect Defendant shall maintain, and provide to the United States upon request, the following information and statements regarding any Covered Multifamily Dwellings intended to be designed, in whole or in part, by it or by any entities in which it has a position of control as an officer, director, member, or manager, or has a ten-percent (10%) or larger ownership share:
5 of 15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 6 of 17
• the name and address of the project; • a description of the project and the individual units; • the name, address and telephone number ofthe architect(s) who are employed or
retained by the Architect Defendant and are involved with the project; • a statement from all architect(s) who are employed or retained by the Architect
Defendant and are involved with the project, acknowledging and describing hislher knowledge of and training in the requirements of the Fair Housing Act and the Guidelines, and in the field of accessible site design, and certifYing that he/she has revi~wed the architectural plans for the project and that the design specifications therein fully comply with the requirements of the Fair Housing Act and the Guidelines. 3. Ifthe architectural plans referred to in paragraph 2 above are revised, and the revisions could have any impact on whether the dwellings or complex comply with the Fair Housing Act and/or the Guidelines, the Architect Defendant shall obtain, maintain, and provide to the United States upon request, a statement from the architect(s) who are employed or retained by the Architect Defendant and are involved with the project, as applicable, that all specifications in the revised architectural plans, as pertinent, comply with the requirements of the Fair Housing Act and the Guidelines. 4. For the term of this Consent Decree, if the Architect Defendant prepares any architectural or site plans, drawing, or blueprints for covered multi-family housing, as defined in the Fair Housing Act, it shall include on such plans, drawing, or blueprints a statement attesting
60fI5

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 7 of 17 I'
to compliance with the Fair Housing Act, and the Architect Defendant shall maintain and provide such plans, drawing, or blueprints to the United States upon request.
5. The Architect Defendant will make its designs for all new construction of Covered Multifamily Dwellings fully compliant with the Accessible Design Requirements, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Standards to the extent applicable to Covered Multifamily Dwellings. Moreover, with respect to all new construction of Covered Multifamily Dwellings outside ofNew York City, the Architect Defendant shall make its design(s) for all such construction fully compliant with the Guidelines or any other safe harbor recognized by HOD. In addition, with respect to all new construction of Covered Multifamily Dwellings within New York City, the Architect Defendant shall make its designs for all such construction fully compliant with either: (a) the Guidelines or any other safe harbor recognized by HUD; or (b) the accessibility specifications of any applicable State or municipal building code (to the extent that design or construction in compliance with such building code(s) does not violate the FHA)
ID. CIVIL PENALTV 6. The Architect Defendant shall pay a civil penalty of TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($20,000) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(1)(C) to vindicate the public interest. Said sum shall be paid in two installments by submitting a check made payable to the "United States of America" to counsel for the United States, with the first payment of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) due within 30 days of the date of the entry ofthis Consent Decree, and the second payment often thousand dollars ($10,000) due within 120 days of the date of the entry of this Consent Decree.
70flS

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 8 of 17
W.EDUCATIONALPROGRAM 

7. Within 30 days of the entry ofthis Consent Decree, the Architect Defendant shall provide a copy ofthis Consent Decree to all its former employees involved in the design of The Larkspur, as well as to all other entities (e,g" !inns) that were involved in the design of The Larkspur as the Architect Defendant's agent, and secure the signed statement from each employee and other entity acknowledging that he, she, or it has received and read the Consent Decree, and has had an opportunity to have questions about the Consent Decree answered. This statement shall be substantially similar to the form ofAppendix A.
8. . During the term of this Consent Decree, any new employee of the Architect Defendant who will be involved in the design of Covered Multifamily Dwellings, as well as any entities (e.g., !inns) acting as the Architect Defendant's agent that will be involved in the design of Covered Multifamily DweBings, shall, within 30 days after the date he or she commences an agency or employment relationship with the Architect Defendant, be given a copy of this Consent Decree by the Architect Defendant, and the Architect Defendant shall require each such new employee or entity to sign a statement, acknowledging that he, she, or it has received and read the Consent Decree, and has had an opportunity to have questions about the Consent Decree answered. This statement shall be substantially similar to the form of Appendix A.
9. In lieu of providing employees, entities or the agents listed in paragraphs 7 through 8 with copies of the Consent Decree as required therein, the Architect Defendant may provide employees or agents with a summary of the Consent Decree, designed to provide personnel with information relevant to their positions. The Architect Defendant may only
8 of 15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 9 of 17
provide such summaries in lieu of copies of the Consent Decree with the United States' advance written approval of the form and content of any proposed summary.
10. The Architect Defendant shall also ensure that it and its employees, as well as any
entities (e,g., firms) acting as its agent, who ~e involved in the design of any Covered
Multifamily Dwellings have a copy of, are familiar with, and personally have reviewed, the Fair Housing Accessibility Guidelines, 56 Fed. Reg. 9472 (1991), and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Fair Housing Act Design Manual, A Manual to Assist Builders in Meetin'g the Accessibility Requirements of the Fair Housing Act (August 1996, Rev. April 1998).
11. Within 90 days of the date of entry ofthis ConsentDecree, the Architect Defendant and all of its employees whose duties, in whole or in part, involve or will involve supervision over the design of Covered Multifamily Dwellings, as well as any entities (e,g., firms) acting as the Architect Defendant's agent that will be involved in the design ofCovered Multifamily Dwellings, shall undergo training on the design and construction requirements of the . Fair Housing Act. The training shan be conducted by a qualified third·party individual, not associated with the Architect Defendant or its counsel, and approved by the Department of Justice, which approval shall not be unreasonably witJ¥leld or delayed; and any expenses associated with this training shall be borne by the Architect Defendant. The Architect Defendant shall provide tc? the United States, 30 days before the training, the name(s), addressees) and telephone number(s) of the trainer(s); and copies ofthe training outlines and any materials to be distributed by the trainers, The Architect Defendant shall provide to the United States, 30 days
90fI5

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 10 of 17
I
I'
after the training, certifications executed by all covered employees and entities confinning their attendance, in a fonn substantially equivalent to Appendix B.
V. NOTIFICATION AND DOCUMENT RETENTION REQUIREMENTS 12. Within 180 days after the date of entry of this Consent Decree, the Architect Defendant shall submit to the United States the executed certifications an~ statements required by paragraphs 7,8. and 11 of this Consent Decree. 13. Thereafter, during the term of this Consent Decree, the Architect Defendant shall, on the anniversary of the entry of this Consent Decree, submit to the United States any additional signed statements required by paragraph 8 of this Consent Decree. 14. For the duration of this Consent Decree, the Architect Defendant shall advise the United States in writing within 15 days of receipt of any written administrative or legal fair housing complaint regarding any property designed by them, or against any employees of the Architect Defendant working at or for any such property, alleging discrbnination on the basis of disability in housing under federal law. Upon reasonable notice, the Architect Defendant shall also provide the United States all information in its possession it may request concerning any such complaint. The Architect Defendant shall also advise counsel for the United States, in writing, within 15 days ofthe resolution of any complaint. 15. For the term of this Consent Decree, the Architect Defendant is required to preserve all records in its possession related to this Consent Decree, for The Larkspur, and any
other Covered Multifamily Dwellings designed by it during the duration of this Consent Decree.
Upon reasonable notice to the Architect Defendant, representatives ofthe United States shall be pennitted to inspect and copy any records of the Architect Defendant or inspect any
100f15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 11 of 17
developments or residential units designed the Architect Defendant bearing on compliance with this Consent Decree at any and all reasonable times, provided, however, that the United States shall endeavor to minimize any inconvenience to the Architect Defendant from such inspections.
VI. RESOLUTION, WAIVER, D~TION OF CONSENT DECREE AND TERMINATION OF LEGAL ACTION
16. This Consent Decree shall remain in effect for three years following entry of this Consent Decree by the Court. By consenting to entry of this Consent Decree, the parties agree that in the event that the Architect Defendant engages ~ any future conduct occurring after entry ofthis Consent Decree that is determined by a Court to be a violation of the Fair Housing Act, such conduct shall constitute a "subsequent violation" pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3614(d)(I)(C)(ii).
17. The Complaint in this Action is hereby dismissed without prejudice as to the Architect Defendant subject to reinstatement in accordance with paragraph 18.
18. The Complaint in this Action shall be reinstated at any time during the duration of this Consent Decree against the Architect Defendant ifthe Court determines the Architect Defendant has failed to perform, in a timely manner, any act required by this Consent Decree or has otherwise failed to act in conformity with any provision ofthis Consent Decree. The Architect Defendant reserves and shall retain, without limitation, any and all available legal remedies and defenses in law and in equity.
19. This Consent Decree hereby releases the Architect Defendant, and each of its principals, officers, employees, agents, directors, managers, partners, members, shareholders, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, related parties, successors, and assigns and all other persons acting in concert or participation with them, from claims by the United States regarding alleged failures, as of the date of entry ofthis Consent Decree, to design The Larkspur pursuant to the
110f15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 12 of 17
,
I.
;1
FHA, including all of the claims alleged in the Action, except for matters referred by the Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3612(0). Provided, however, that the Architect Defendant is not released from any claims by the United States concerning any Covered Multifamily Dwellings other than The Lark~pur, including any claims regarding previously designed. dwellings and any claims regarding current or future designed dwellings. Nor is the Architect Defendant released from any claims regarding FHA violations at The Larkspur other than failures to design those properties as of the Effective Date of this Consent Decree as required by the FHA.
20. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for the duration of this Consent Decree to enforce the terms of the Consent Decree. The United States may move the Court to extend the duration of the Consent Decree in the interests ofjustice. The Architect Defendant r~serves its right to object to any such extension and to oppose any such motion.
21. . The United States and the Architect Defendant shall endeavor, in good faith, to resolve informally any differences regarding interpretation of and compliance with this Consent Decree prior to bringing such matters to the Court for resolution. However, in the event of a failure by the Architect Defendant to perform, in a timely manner, any act required by this Consent Decree or otherwise for their failure to act in conformance with any provision thereof, the United States may move this Court to impose any remedy authorized by law or equity, including, but not limited to, an order requiring performance of such act or deeming such act to have been performed, and an award of any damages, costs, and reasonable attorney's fees which may have been occasioned by the violation or failure to perform.
12 of 15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 13 of 17
II
22. Upon the expiration of the Consent Decree, the Complaint in this Actio.Jl shaH be dismissed with prejudice as to the Architect Defendant.
vn. SCOPE OF CONSENT DECREE
.23. The obligations in this Consent Decree shall not extend to subsequent employers offonner principals and/or employees ofthe Architect Defendapt solely on account of,that employment relationship.
VIII. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE 24. Any time limits for perfonnance imposed by this Consent Decree may be extended by the mutual written agreement of the United States and the Architect Defendant.
IX. COSTS OF LITIGATION 25. Each party will bear its own costs and attorney's fees associated with this litigation.
X. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS AND DEFENSES 25. All obligations agreed to by the Architect Defendant in this Consent Decree are without prejudice to the Architect Defendant's claims, and any and all available rights, remedies and defenses against the other Defendants and/or any other person or entity, including, without limitation, claims, rights and remedies concerning negligence, malpractice, contribution, indemnity, and successor liability, all of which claims, rights and remedies are expressly reserved. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be used as evidence of the liability, or lack thereof, of the Architect Defendant or .any person or entity not a party to the Consent 'Decree.
13 of 15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 14 of 17
II
!
XI. NOTICES TO PARTIES 26. All notices under or relating to this Consent Decree shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when sent as follows: Ifto the United States: by first-class mail addressed to Chief, Civil Rights Unit, Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District ofNew York, 86 Chambers Street, Third Floor, New York, New York 10007, and by fax to (212) 637-2717. If to the Architect Defendant: by first-class mail addressed to Michael T. Rogers, Wasserman Grubin & Rogers, LLP, 1700 Broadway, 42nd Floor, New York, New York 10019, and by fax to (212) 956-5255. Ifto Larsen: by first-class mail addressed to Michael T. Rogers, Wasserman Grubin & Rogers, LLP, 1700 Broadway, 42nd Floor, New York, New York 10019, and by fax to (212) 956-5255.
14 of 15

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 15 of 17

The undersigned apply for and consent to be bound upon the entry of this Consent Decree:

Far the United States:

mOMAS E, PEREZ 
 Assistant Attorney General 
 Civil Rights Division 


PREET BHARARA 


Vnited States Attorney

. 


a~ Br.

LIl1J

.' F

CARINA H. SCHOENBERGER

EMlLY E. DAUGHTRY

Assistant United States Attorneys

86 Chambers Street, 3rd Floor

New York, New York 10007
Tel. NOB, (212) 637-27341282212777 Fax No. (212) 637-2686/2702 Li.Yu@usdoj,gov

Carina.Schoenberger@usdoj.gov
. Bmily.Daughtry@usdoj.gov

For Defendant Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP:
By:~~=+.~~~_ _~_ ROB

S09RDERED:

'15 oil 5

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 16 of 17

APPENDIX A
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CONSENT ORDER

I

• am an employee of

and my duties

includ~

. I have received and read a copy of the Consent

Decree in United States ofAmerica v. Larkspur, LLC, et al., 11 Civ. 6321 (S.D.N.Y.), and have

been given instruction on (1) the tenns ofthis Consent Decree, (2) the requirements 'of the Fair

Housing Act, particularly related to the Act's design and construction requirements, and (3) my

responsibilities and obligations under the Consent Decree and the Fair Housing Act. I have had

all of my questions concerning the Consent Decree answered to my satisfaction.

_ _--1',20_

Employee Signature

Case 1:11-cv-06321-DAB Document 20 Filed 01/26/12 Page 17 of 17

APPENDIXB CERTIFICATION OF FAIR HOUSING TRAINING

On

,20-, I attended training on the federal Fair Housing Act, including its

requirements conct;:rning physical accessibility for persons with disabilities. I was also instructed

as to the rental policies and procedures, including the nondiscrimination, complaint, and

reasonable accommodation policies ofthe Fair Housing Act. I have had an of my questions

concerning the Fair Housing Act answered to my satisfaction.

Employee Signature

Print Name

Date

 
 Case: 1:11-cv-06321-DAB As of: 02/11/2012 06:52 PM EST 1 of 4

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:11−cv−06321−DAB

CLOSED, ECF

United States Of America v. Larkspur LLC et al Assigned to: Judge Deborah A. Batts Cause: 42:405 Fair Housing Act
Plaintiff United States Of America

Date Filed: 09/09/2011 Date Terminated: 01/26/2012 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 443 Civil Rights: Accommodations Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff
represented by Brian Marc Feldman U.S. Attorney's Office, SDNY (Chambers Street) 86 Chambers Street New York, NY 10007 (212)−637−2777 Fax: (212)−637−2717 Email: brian.feldman@usdoj.gov TERMINATED: 10/06/2011 LEAD ATTORNEY

Carina Hyatt Schoenberger U.S. Attorney's Office, SDNY 86 Chambers Street New York, NY 10007 (212) 637−2800 Fax: (212) 637−2702 Email: carina.schoenberger@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Li Yu U.S. Attorney's Office, SDNY (Chambers Street) 86 Chambers Street New York, NY 10007 (212) 637−2734 Fax: (212) 637−2686 Email: li.yu@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Larkspur LLC
Defendant Larkspur Managers, LLC Defendant

represented by Kenneth Gary Roberts Cozen O'Connor 277 Park Avenue New York, NY 10172 (212) 883−4914 Fax: (212) 672−1114 Email: kroberts@cozen.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Kenneth Gary Roberts (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:11-cv-06321-DAB As of: 02/11/2012 06:52 PM EST 2 of 4

Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC

represented by Douglas J. Lutz Wasserman Grubin &Rogers LLP 1700 Broadway, 42nd Floor New York, NY 10019 (212) 581−3320 Fax: (212) 956−5255 Email: DLUTZ@WGRLAW.COM ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Priya Swaminathan Curtis, Mallet−Prevost, Colt &Mosle, LLP(NYC) 101 Park Avenue New York, NY 10178 (212)696−8873x607261−0386 Fax: (917) 368−8873 Email: pswaminathan@wgrlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Cross Claimant Larkspur Managers, LLC

represented by Kenneth Gary Roberts (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Cross Claimant Larkspur LLC

represented by Kenneth Gary Roberts (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Cross Defendant Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC

Date Filed 09/09/2011
09/09/2011 09/09/2011 09/09/2011 09/12/2011
09/12/2011
10/05/2011
10/05/2011

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against Larkspur LLC, Larkspur Managers, LLC, Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC. Document filed by United States Of America.(ama) (Entered: 09/12/2011)
SUMMONS ISSUED as to Larkspur LLC, Larkspur Managers, LLC, Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC. (ama) (Entered: 09/12/2011)
Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck is so designated. (ama) (Entered: 09/12/2011)
Case Designated ECF. (ama) (Entered: 09/12/2011)
2 RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by Larkspur LLC, Larkspur Managers, LLC.(Roberts, Kenneth) (Entered: 09/12/2011)
3 ANSWER to 1 Complaint., CROSSCLAIM against Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC. Document filed by Larkspur Managers, LLC, Larkspur LLC.(Roberts, Kenneth) (Entered: 09/12/2011)
4 CONSENT JUDGMENT # 11,1915 in favor of United States Of America against Larkspur LLC, Larkspur Managers, LLC, in the amount of $ 35,000. (Signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts on 10/05/2011) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal)(jnm) (Entered: 10/05/2011)
5 Filed APPENDIX A re Public and Common Use Areas. Document filed by Larkspur LLC. (cd) (Entered: 10/06/2011)

Case: 1:11-cv-06321-DAB As of: 02/11/2012 06:52 PM EST 3 of 4

10/06/2011 10/07/2011 10/07/2011 10/07/2011 10/11/2011 10/11/2011 10/12/2011
10/12/2011 10/12/2011 10/13/2011 10/13/2011
10/13/2011
10/17/2011

6 CONSENT ORDER GRANTING SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY: Carina H Schoenberger is substituted in place of Brian M Feldman for the United States of America. (Signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts on 10/6/2011) (cd) (Entered: 10/06/2011)
7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. Larkspur LLC served on 9/14/2011, answer due 10/5/2011. Service was accepted by Kenneth G. Roberts. Document filed by United States Of America. (Schoenberger, Carina) (Entered: 10/07/2011)
8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. Larkspur Managers, LLC served on 9/14/2011, answer due 10/5/2011. Service was accepted by Kenneth G. Roberts. Document filed by United States Of America. (Schoenberger, Carina) (Entered: 10/07/2011)
9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC served on 9/14/2011, answer due 10/5/2011. Service was accepted by Michael Rogers. Document filed by United States Of America. (Schoenberger, Carina) (Entered: 10/07/2011)
10 RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC.(Lutz, Douglas) (Entered: 10/11/2011)
11 ANSWER to 3 Crossclaim. Document filed by Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC.(Lutz, Douglas) (Entered: 10/11/2011)
12 ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Deborah A. Batts from Priya Swaminathan dated 10/11/2011 re: We represent defendant Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLP ("Larsen Shein") in an action before this Court titled US v. Larkspur, 11 Civ. 6321 and write to respectfully request that Larsen Shein's time to respond to the complaint be extended to October 12, 2011. ENDORSEMENT: Granted NPT 10/05/11. Further requests shall be timely. (Signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts on 10/12/2011) (lmb) (Entered: 10/12/2011)
13 FILING ERROR − DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY − MOTION to Dismiss. Document filed by Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC. Responses due by 11/7/2011 (Attachments: # 1 Memo of Law, # 2 Affidavit)(Lutz, Douglas) Modified on 10/13/2011 (db). (Entered: 10/12/2011)
***NOTE TO ATTORNEY TO RE−FILE DOCUMENT − DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY ERROR. Note to Attorney Douglas J. Lutz to RE−FILE Document 13 MOTION to Dismiss. ERROR(S): Supporting Documents are filed separately, each receiving their own document #. (db) (Entered: 10/13/2011)
14 FILING ERROR − WRONG EVENT TYPE SELECTED FROM MENU/DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY − FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Complaint. Document filed by Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC. Responses due by 11/7/2011 (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Motion, # 2 Affidavit)(Swaminathan, Priya) Modified on 10/14/2011 (ldi). (Entered: 10/13/2011)
***NOTE TO ATTORNEY TO RE−FILE DOCUMENT − EVENT TYPE ERROR. Note to Attorney Priya Swaminathan to RE−FILE Document 14 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Complaint. Use the event type Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion found under the event list Replies, Opposition and Supporting Documents. You must file the "Notice of Motion" document first using the Motion to Dismiss event, then re−file the Memorandum of Law and link to the motion. (ldi) (Entered: 10/14/2011)
***NOTE TO ATTORNEY TO RE−FILE DOCUMENT − DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY ERROR. Note to Attorney Priya Swaminathan to RE−FILE Document 14 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Complaint. ERROR(S): Supporting documents must be filed separately, each receiving their own document number. You must re−file the "Notice of Motion" document first, then file the supporting documents separately and link to the motion. Memorandum of Law and Affidavit in Support of Motion are both found under the event list Replies, Opposition and Supporting Documents. (ldi) (Entered: 10/14/2011)
15 MOTION to Dismiss to Dismiss the Complaint. Document filed by Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC. Responses due by 11/2/2011(Swaminathan, Priya)

Case: 1:11-cv-06321-DAB As of: 02/11/2012 06:52 PM EST 4 of 4

10/17/2011 10/17/2011 10/26/2011
01/09/2012
01/26/2012

(Entered: 10/17/2011)
16 AFFIDAVIT of Michael T. Rogers in Support re: 15 MOTION to Dismiss to Dismiss the Complaint.. Document filed by Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC. (Swaminathan, Priya) (Entered: 10/17/2011)
17 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 15 MOTION to Dismiss to Dismiss the Complaint.. Document filed by Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC. (Swaminathan, Priya) (Entered: 10/17/2011)
18 ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Deborah A. Batts from Li Yu dated 10/25/2011 re: requesting that the briefing schedule for the motion to dismiss be adjourned by 30 days. If granted, the Government's opposition papers will due by November 26, 2011, and the Architect's reply papers will due on December 6, 2011. ENDORSEMENT: GRANTED SO ORDERED.( Responses due by 11/26/2011, Replies due by 12/6/2011.) (Signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts on 10/26/2011) (ama) (Entered: 10/26/2011)
19 ORDER: Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why its cause of action against Defendant Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Lyell Theatre Corp. v. Loews Corp., 682 F.2d 37, 42 (2d Cir. 1982) (holding that a district court's authority to dismiss an action for plaintiff's failure to prosecute "cannot seriously be doubted"). If Plaintiff fails by February 10, 2012 to show cause, Plaintiff's cause of action against Defendant Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC shall be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff's showing of good cause, if any, shall be made by affidavit. (Signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts on 1/9/2012) (mro) (Entered: 01/10/2012)
20 CONSENT JUDGMENT # 12,0139 in favor of United States Of America against Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder LLC for civilpenalty in the amount of $ 20,000.00. (Signed by Judge Deborah A. Batts on 1/25/12) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal)(dt) (Entered: 01/26/2012)