5/7 931:9-934:17, 943:13-946:16).[FN13]
The proposal included new sheetrock and flooring, terrace door step and closet door
replacement, molding installation, and painting (Defs Exh 6; 5/17
1552:6-14). Plaintiff acknowledged, both at trial and in a previous deposition, that she
had no specific knowledge of her attorney having provided explicit consent to access at
that time (5/7 933:13-936:11, 946:10-16).
In the intervening period, Plaintiff continued to observe numerous leaks and refused
to permit repairs to occur until the leaks were resolved to her satisfaction (Pl Exh
12). Plaintiff also requested changes to the scope of work and provided access to
Allcon only for the purpose of creating an amended proposal (5/16
1406:6-1407:6, 1456:13-22). Though substantially similar, a revised proposal sent to
Plaintiff's counsel (again, the same attorney appearing at trial) on July 23, 2010 added
four additional items, including additional insulation, at a total additional cost of
$27,500.00, or $1,000.00 more than the original proposal (5/16 1410:9-1413:1;
compare Defs Exhs 6 and 7). The letter accompanying the proposal again
requested immediate access (Defs Exh 7). Despite multiple follow-ups, there is
no record of Plaintiff providing access for repairs until 2016 (5/17 1549, et
seq.; 1579:24-1580:1-4).[FN14]
The Corporation did not enter the Apartment before then because it did not believe
that the circumstances constituted an emergency permitting entry to the Apartment under
the By-Laws, particularly because Plaintiff had already commenced litigation
(5/16 1419:3-8; 5/17 1550:20-1551:13). After Plaintiff consented to
access, work began in February 2016 and ended shortly thereafter, in April 2016