CARPETLAND V. DANIS

Carpetland patched and leveled floors for Danis on the U.C. French Hall Project, but Danis refused to pay Carpetland the $8,586 billing because of a change order dispute according to court filings. (97CV27120)

Waste Management sued Danis over the toxic stew in two landfills sold to Waste Management by Danis. One of the landfills had been declared a "Superfund" site. (A9501058)

In this suit Danis complained that Travelers, who insured Danis' two garbage disposal sites, failed to agree to pay all legal liabilities, including costs for environmental damage. Danis also wanted the court to void Travelers Pollution Exclusion Clause. One of the garbage dumps has been declared a "Super Fund" site by the EPA. (95-CVH-128904)

Ohio State awarded a construction contract to Danis, rather than Cleveland Construction, even though Cleveland was the low bidder, and Danis had ongoing problems on the ODAS project at Ohio University, including claims against Danis by the University, and the delay of the project. Although Danis received this job at the Fisher Business College, the following court case reveals all did not go well. (96CVH-42585)

STONEROCK V. DANIS

According to this complaint, in 1997 Stonerock was hanging drywall on a Danis job site at Fisher Business College, when he fell 15 feet through an unguarded opening in the floor. He suffered severe injures and sued Danis for over $25,000 for failing to provide a safe work place. (99CV0087170)

According to the court complaint David Schmeltzer worked for Danis in 1998. Although he was white, he discovered that Danis allowed virulently racist practices on its job sites. Racist comments were made, even in the presence of supervisors. A foreman passed around a "Nigger hunting license." Schmeltzer was harassed when he objected to these practices. Items such as lit cigarettes were thrown at him. When an African-American employee’s leg was injured, another Danis employee began jumping on top of him and joking "Let’s ————— him" and acting as if he was engaging in a sex act with the African American worker. Since Danis ignored Schmeltzer’s complaints on many occasions, Schmeltzer finally quit Danis and sued for his unemployment benefits. (99-CVF-05-3676)

In 1998, Ford Development provided over $10,000 in materials and services to Danis and others, who did not pay, according to court documents. (98CV33452)

SUPERIOR ELECTRIC V. DANIS-SHOOK, DANIS INDUSTRIES AND SHOOK - Superior was a subcontractor to a Danis joint venture known as Danis-Shook on the Columbus Wastewater Treatment Plant. But Danis-Shook did not Pay Superior what was asked. Superior filed liens against that project and then filed court suits against Danis’ customer, the City of Columbus, Danis and Shook. Danis settled the suit, but only paid $300,000 on the $488,000 claim. So Superior sued again for the additional $88,000. In the meantime, Danis’ customer had to suffer having liens against its project. Danis’ customers also had to endure liens in several of the following cases. (93CVH11-7668)

CAMERON SERVICE CO. V. DANIS, OTHERS - Cameron provided $6,770 in services to Danis, but Danis did not pay. So Cameron filed a lien against Danis customer’s property and then filed a court suit against Danis and others. (93CVH11-8105)

JLCS V. DANIS, OTHERS - JLCS worked as a subcontractor to Danis on a construction job at Friendship Village, in Dublin, Ohio. Danis did not pay. JLCS filed a lien against Danis’s customer and a court suit against Danis and others, seeking to collect $42,171 according to court documents. (93CVH11-8044)

DANIS’ MANY FEDERAL PROBLEMS

It is troubling enough that Danis has ended up defending itself in OSHA hearings and local courts, but Danis has also mired itself and its customers, vendors, workers and subcontractors in a maze of federal litigation. A preliminary check of federal court indexes shows that Danis and its related companies are involved in scores of suits. At the time this issue of The Contractors Critic went to press, we were unable to obtain details on every case, but Danis is the defendant in approximately 80% of these federal suits. Following are preliminary summaries of some of the federal actions involving Danis. The Critic intends to present full details on Danis’ federal trials in the next issue.

Employers Fire Insurance v. Danis Building Construction, others - Danis, its insurance company and an injured worker fought in at least two federal and one state court suits over who should pay for the $1 million worth of liabilities arising out of the injured worker’s lawsuit. (97-cv-241, 99-CV-528, Montgomery County, Ohio-99-3903 )

Moody v. Danis Building Construction, others - This is another suit over Danis’ insurance policies. (97-CV-335, Montgomery County, 96-4749)

Purestream, United States, v. Danis Industries, others - Danis was the defendant in this $115,000 suit over a federal construction contract. (91-CV-64)

RLI Insurance v. Danis Clarkco Landfill, others - This case involved an injury. (94-CV-529)

TGA, United States V. Danis Environmental, others - Danis was the defendant in yet another suit over a federal contract. (93-CV-115)

Danis Clarkco Landfill v. German Township