Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
*************************************
*
Daniel J. Lawsure, *
*
Plaintiff * COMPLAINT
* Jury Trial Requested
v. *
*
Fulcrum Associates, Inc., *
*
Defendant *
*
*************************************
NOW COMES the plaintiff Daniel J. Lawsure, by and through his attorneys Douglas,
Leonard & Garvey, P.C., and respectfully submits the within Complaint, stating as follows:
I. Parties
1. The plaintiff Daniel Lawsure resides at 11 Hill Way, Cape Elizabeth, Maine
04107.
3. The Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332 because
the plaintiff and the defendant are residents of different states and the amount in controversy is
4. Venue is proper because the acts and omissions giving rise to this matter occurred
1
Case 1:19-cv-01156-SM Document 1 Filed 11/13/19 Page 2 of 5
III. Facts
about July 29, 2018, at a base annual salary of $110,000.00. The plaintiff’s job responsibilities
commercial establishments on the first level, a parking garage underneath, and a 4-story
apartment complex above the commercial establishments. The defendant was the General
6. In the initial months of his employment the plaintiff received praise from the
defendant’s management that he was doing a “great job.” In fact, the defendant encouraged the
plaintiff to acquire an apartment close to the job site so he would not have to commute from
Cape Elizabeth. The defendant paid the rent associated with the apartment. The defendant
further instructed the plaintiff to buy furnishings for the apartment at the defendant’s expense.
7. In or around early September of 2018, the plaintiff received a report from FGG
Consulting (FGG) regarding the Washington Street development. The FGG report stated that
that the ground improvement system was not adequate for the development. The plaintiff
understood that, if the FGG report were correct, the foundation of the development would likely
fail, leading to the possible collapse of the development. If the development collapsed, people
occupying it would be in peril, as well as people in the surroundings. The development abuts the
Dover District Court, the Shaheen and Gordon law firm, City Hall, Aubuchon Hardware, and the
8. The plaintiff’s concerns for the safety of the structure increased when, in or
around September of 2018, he observed cracks in the foundation of the structure before a load
2
Case 1:19-cv-01156-SM Document 1 Filed 11/13/19 Page 3 of 5
9. The plaintiff approached the defendant’s owner, Jeffrey Luter, and advised him to
suspend construction and pay appropriate heed to the concerns raised by FGG. “We can’t play
ostrich with this,” Mr. Lawsure stated. Mr. Lawsure emphasized that the structure needed to
meet Code requirements, including the requirements of the International Building Code. Mr.
Lawsure reported that proceeding with construction without heeding the FGG report would cause
the development to fail to meet the requirements of the International Building Code.
10. Mr. Luter replied, “I can’t afford to lose another million dollars.”
11. The defendant fired Mr. Lawsure on or about December 7, 2018. Notably, the
defendant never reimbursed Mr. Lawsure for the furnishings that the defendant told him to buy
COUNT I
(Wrongful Discharge)
12. The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are repeated and incorporated herein
by reference.
13. The defendant fired the plaintiff with bad faith and malice, firing him without
warning and because he expressed concerns about the development structure that implicated
public safety.
14. The defendant fired the plaintiff because he performed acts encouraged by public
15. As a direct and proximate result of the plaintiff’s wrongful discharge, the plaintiff
has suffered and continues to suffer damages, including but not limited to lost wages, lost
earning capacity, lost employment benefits, emotional distress, humiliation, inconvenience, and
3
Case 1:19-cv-01156-SM Document 1 Filed 11/13/19 Page 4 of 5
COUNT II
16. The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are repeated and incorporated herein
by reference.
17. The defendant fired the plaintiff because he reported what he reasonably believed
to be a violation of the International Building Code and thereby of the laws of the State of New
reinstatement, back pay and reasonable attorney’s pursuant to RSA 275-E:2, II.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff Daniel J. Lawsure respectfully prays this Honorable Court:
D. Award the plaintiff damages for lost wages, lost employment benefits and lost
earning capacity;
4
Case 1:19-cv-01156-SM Document 1 Filed 11/13/19 Page 5 of 5
Respectfully submitted,
DANIEL J. LAWSURE
By his attorneys,
DOUGLAS, LEONARD & GARVEY, P.C.
5
Case 1:19-cv-01156-SM Document 1-1 Filed 11/13/19 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:19-cv-01156-SM Document 1-2 Filed 11/13/19 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:19-cv-01156-SM Document 1-3 Filed 11/13/19 Page 1 of 1