{"id":24119,"date":"2015-04-08T12:10:01","date_gmt":"2015-04-08T16:10:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=24119"},"modified":"2015-04-08T12:10:01","modified_gmt":"2015-04-08T16:10:01","slug":"con-ed-is-probably-not-at-fault-in-the-east-village-disaster","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=24119","title":{"rendered":"Con Ed is probably not at fault in the East Village disaster"},"content":{"rendered":"

Speaking of Con Ed and having read most of the stories about the East Village explosion, I pretty well expected this article: Landlord\u2019s Lawyer Blames Con Ed in East Village Explosion – NYTimes.com<\/a>. It begins:<\/p>\n

A lawyer for the owner of two of the buildings in Manhattan\u2019s East Village that were destroyed by a deadly explosion last week tried to deflect blame away from the landlord on Wednesday and toward Consolidated Edison, the utility company that provided gas to the buildings.<\/em><\/p>\n

The lawyer, Thomas M. Curtis, provided the first response on behalf of the landlord, Maria Hrynenko, since an explosion and fire reduced three buildings to rubble on March 26 and left two men dead. In a brief defense of Ms. Hrynenko during a phone interview, Mr. Curtis portrayed her as a caring landlord who \u201cwould not harm anybody intentionally.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Mr. Curtis conceded that Ms. Hrynenko had received a warning of a possible gas leak from the manager of Sushi Park, a restaurant on the ground floor of 121 Second Avenue, one of the buildings that was destroyed. Rather than calling the utility company, Con Edison, or dialing 911, Ms. Hrynenko sent her son Michael and a contractor to check out the odor, Mr. Curtis said. Both men were injured in the blast.<\/em><\/p>\n

Of course Hrynenko–who, apparently, was in some way involved in having a restaurant gas line illegally tapped in order to provide gas to her tenants<\/a>–must now find someone else to blame. Her lawyer’s statement, as I read it, along with reading the rest of the information the Times has provided, is a not particularly persuasive diversion. Especially when he had to concede that Hrynenko had a warning of a gas leak but did not immediately call Con Ed.<\/p>\n

A plumbing contractor has been mentioned as possibly at fault but Con Ed has the deep pockets. Thus, Curtis’s defensive statement.<\/p>\n

What I predict will happen here–and I’ll keep us up to date as to the accuracy of my prediction–is:<\/p>\n