Anne Bryan's parents
have been calling for license revocation for the past two
years
Philadelphia, PA (December 4, 2017) - It has been two years
since John Bryan, P.E., father of Philadelphia building collapse
victim Anne Bryan, formally petitioned the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania to revoke the architectural license of Plato A.
Marinakos, AIA, for his role in failing to prevent the June 5, 2013
catastrophe that took the life of his daughter and other innocent
victims. Mr. Bryan, a licensed engineer, and his wife, Nancy
Winkler, said despite criminal convictions, and a landmark
settlement in the civil litigation resulting from the catastrophe,
the full measure of justice demands that Marinakos, the
architect-owners representative, lose his professional license.
The complaint (#15-41-12150, PA Dept. of State, Architects
Licensure Board) filed against Marinakos notes that despite
admitting he failed to take actions that could have prevented the
tragedy, he testified at the building collapse criminal trial under
a full grant of immunity from prosecution. An inexperienced and
unlicensed demolition contractor (Griffin Campbell), was convicted,
and the project's heavy equipment operator pleaded guilty in the
case. They are both serving prison sentences.
While Marinakos avoided prosecution by virtue of his plea
bargain, he was among those (including his client, the late
Richard Basciano and STB Investment Corp.) found responsible for
the collapse by a jury in the civil trial.
Specifically, the jury determined that Marinakos, who was in
charge of ensuring safety at and around the demolition site,
was negligent; that his negligence was a cause in bringing
about harm (i.e. the death of Anne Bryan and six other victims as
well as life-threatening injury to others), and that his conduct
was extreme and outrageous.
During the civil trial plaintiffs' attorney Robert J.
Mongeluzzi, of Saltz, Mongeluzzi, Barrett & Bendesky, P.C.,
argued that days before the collapse, Marinakos, concerned the
project was running behind schedule, instructed Campbell to switch
from hand demolition to a dangerous mechanical demolition. This
fundamental change in the method of demolition created a highly
dangerous condition at the adjoining - open-for-business -
Salvation Army thrift store. The collapse occurred while the
store was fully staffed and packed with shoppers and donors
(including Anne Bryan and her best friend, also killed in the
catastrophe).
"Given the jury's verdict that Marinakos' conduct was extreme
and outrageous, and caused seven deaths, we cannot understand how
Marinakos continues to practice architecture in Pennsylvania," said
Mr. Bryan and Ms. Winkler. "How is it possible that his actions
leading up to the building collapse are not the textbook definition
- under the rules of the state agency that oversees architects - of
professional violations that warrant license revocation?"
They noted that the role of the state Board (established by
Act 281 of 1982) is to "protect the health, safety and property
of the people of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through the
regulation of the practice and licensure of the architectural
profession. Among its other functions, the Board promulgates
standards of professional conduct and establishes rules and
regulations for the examination of licensure applicants."
In their interaction to date with the Board (in which it will
only confirm there's an ongoing inquiry), Anne Bryan's parents are
also trying to get answers to the following questions:
- How many licensed architects have lost their license for
professional misconduct in Pennsylvania since the Board was created
in 1982? (Its website identifies only one - and that
was as a result of embezzlement.)
- If an architect can lose a license for embezzlement, would the
facts in the fatal Market Street building collapse case also
constitute grounds for license revocation?
- How can the Board, given its mandate to protect public health
and safety, justify the delay - more than four years from the
incident, and over two years from the complaint filing - in
addressing the Marinakos case?
Mr. Bryan's complaint to the Board detailed sections of the Code
of Professional Conduct violated by Marinakos, based on trial
testimony, including his own. These documented infractions
included:
- Failure to stop the unsafe, lethal mechanical demolition: Just
a few days before the disaster, he saw the mechanical excavator had
been brought to the site, but but did nothing to prevent its
use.
- Failure to prevent an unsafe condition by allowing the improper
demolition of the critical adjoining building party wall: He was
fully aware that the chimney of the Salvation Army store was
attached to and supported by the 2136-38 Market St. building
shared/party wall, and yet he advocated putting lives at risk put
lives - in and around the open thrift store - when he suggested
that the unsupported wall be taken down around the chimney.
- Failure, on the night before the collapse when he visited the
site, to shut down the demolition despite observing - and
photographing - the unbraced masonry party wall looming over the
Salvation Army store. He testified at trial that he told Mr.
(Griffin) Campbell (his foreman), "Griffin, you can't leave this
wall here. This is just crazy. I mean, you can't do that." Despite
the fact that Campbell reported to him, Marinakos never directed
him to shut down the job until the site could be secured and deemed
safe for workers, and most of all, employees and visitors to the
store. He had the knowledge and the authority, and did
nothing.
Attorney Mongeluzzi argued at trial, and the jury determined by
verdict, that Marinakos' conduct was extreme and outrageous, and
was a cause of the collapse.
Contacts:
Robert J. Mongeluzzi
rmongeluzzi@smbb.com
Steph Rosenfeld
steph@idadvisors.com