Listed here are the reality: Chrome Style Group Inc and Sueli Costa were equally discovered to stay violation of agreement in a Fresh York State municipal courtroom, a JUDGE was offered the situation from both stops during 3 individual court proceedings in NYC. Public file court view # (35989 CVN 2009)
The plaintiff was self-represented, but Sueli Costa and Chrome Style Team were represented with a lawyer on 2 from the 3 proceedings. The judge discovered Chrome Style Collection inc and Sueli Costa EQUALLY accountable and requested them to pay for a view of $25,000 bucks plus interest.By nowadays the defendants have created no work to stay the cost for that view.
THE COURT JUDGMENT IS EXTREMELY OBVIOUS when it says: "The common account and displays posted for this courtroom create that in March, plaintiff and offender entered into an oral agreement. [.] Plaintiff's account and displays demonstrated problems. She was delivered non conforming products, which didn't meet up with the conditions of the agreement. A contact was delivered by offender to plaintiff declaring no further might take any results or heal the flaws within the products, consequently, it's your decision and view of the courtroom that plaintiff has confirmed problems and it is eligible for $25,000 with curiosity from July 15. Consequently, for that above-stated factors the plaintiff is granted problems within the quantity of $25,000.00 with curiosity from July 15. This comprises your decision and view of the courtroom."
0 comments