Daniel Garigen claims to be a seasoned Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and a valued partner of Dansa D’Arata Soucia LLP. Garigen graduated from Daemen College in 2010 with a combined BS/MS degree in Professional Accountancy with a strong academic background.
Daniel Garigen describes himself to have gathered a plethora of knowledge in the finance industry throughout the course of his career, displaying his proficiency in a variety of fields. As a partner at Dansa D’Arata, he claims that he has successfully managed audits for businesses and non-profit organizations with budgets ranging from $1 million to $100 million.
Notably, Daniel Garigen claims that he expertly negotiated qualifying replacement property acquisitions, effectively postponing over $20 million in real estate condemnation proceeds.
Daniel Garigen claims to have also contributed significantly to the field of corporate sales. Daniel Garigen also claims that because of his important participation in the sale of a software company to a public organization, which resulted in a spectacular $55 million agreement, demonstrates his extraordinary negotiating abilities and strategic intelligence.
When Daniel Garigen was Fighting Accusations in the Court
A Buffalo-based accounting firm’s two partners are fighting bitterly over the company’s future.
The argument has gone into a courtroom, with one party accusing the other of fraud and sexual misbehavior and claiming that the action is nothing more than a power grab. Following their appearance before a judge last week, both parties declared a triumph.
Dansa D’Arata & Soucia CPAs LLP shareholder Daniel Garigen has accused managing partner Eric Soucia of financial and workplace wrongdoing in a case filed this month in the New York Supreme Court seeking to force Soucia to relinquish control of the firm.
Garigen’s lawsuit accuses Soucia of potentially costing the company up to $750,000 due to mishandling of the company’s 401(k) account, as well as harassing and mistreating Dansa D’Arata employees.
“Mr. Soucia’s behavior has been and continues to be erratic, unprofessional, fraudulent, and possibly criminal,” Garigen argues in his lawsuit, which was filed on February 2 by attorney Brian D. Gwitt. “It is undisputed that he is jeopardizing the continued operation of Dansa D’Arata.”
Soucia and his attorney argue that Daniel Garigen is falsely accusing Soucia, who owns 60% of the firm, in order to take over the company, which has grown since the two bought out the initial partners in 2021.
According to Soucia’s attorney, Charles C. Ritter Jr., the two men paid more than $4 million for the firm less than 14 months ago and have already received an offer that values Dansa D’Arata at $12 million.
Furthermore, according to Ritter, Garigen inappropriately launched a public lawsuit rather than submitting the matter to arbitration as required by the partnership agreement.
“The petition is little more than a narrative of sensationalized allegations drafted as a coercive tool to embarrass and discredit me as part of a scheme by Daniel Garigen, my minority partner, to seize control of the partnership,” Soucia wrote in his affidavit.
Michael J. Dansa and Daniel J. D’Arata formed the accounting and consulting firm in 1999. The company is headquartered downtown and employs approximately 40 people.
Dansa and D’Arata sold their partnership interests to Soucia and Daniel Garigen in a deal that took effect on January 1, 2022. Dansa and D’Arata continue to work as contract employees for the firm, which lists them as partners on its website.
Soucia, who was already a named partner, took a controlling interest and urged Garigen to participate in the transaction, according to Ritter.
According to Garigen’s lawsuit, which was originally reported on by Buffalo Business First, the claims Garigen leveled against his partner stretch back to 2018. Several focus on Soucia’s role as plan administrator in managing 401(k) retirement plans for Dansa D’Arata partners and other employees.
First, Garigen says that Soucia utilized partnership funds to make elective contributions to his personal 401(k) account between 2018 and 2021, effectively stealing $60,000 from the company.
According to Garigen, Soucia did this by depositing a disproportionate amount of business profit-sharing contributions into the fund and then promptly withdrawing the money using a fake “hardship” claim. According to the lawsuit, Soucia was able to elude detection for years because he controlled access to the 401(k) information.
Garigen argues Soucia used a dubious hardship justification to withdraw $350,000 from his 401(k) plan between 2019 and last year. According to the lawsuit, this “abuse” exposes the firm to financial danger, at a minimum for restoring the wrongfully removed $350,000.
What distinguishes sexual assault from sexual harassment? What about improper sexual behavior?
Sexual harassment, which is generally considered a civil infraction but isn’t necessarily, is when unwanted sexual conduct creates a hostile environment. Sexual assault is a crime that involves non-consensual sexual touch or penetration. The word “sexual misconduct” is used broadly to refer to a range of sexual actions, and the definition might vary based on the situation and the applicable rules, including harassment.
According to Garigen, the 401(k) plan could potentially be disqualified, which means employees may have to pay income taxes on money they contributed and, if so, they may sue the company.
Finally, according to Garigen, Dansa D’Arata will be required to make major corrective payments in 2019, 2020, 2021, and potentially 2022 to increase profit-sharing contributions to non-owner employees, increasing the total cost to the firm for the 401(k) errors to up to $750,000.
Garigen is likewise concerned about Soucia’s personal and professional behavior. According to the lawsuit, Soucia was orally reprimanded and ordered to attend sexual harassment training in 2019 after three women at the firm lodged complaints against him.
Garigen reports that an intoxicated Soucia told her, “I own you,” threw pretzels and chocolates at her, and pulled at her hair, asking, “How does it feel not to be a CPA?”
A second lady claimed Soucia inappropriately grabbed her hair and told her, “Your hair was bothering me like that,” according to the lawsuit.
According to Garigen, the two ladies left the firm immediately after these encounters, as did a third lady who accused Soucia of making condescending, insulting statements about her.
Soucia agreed to cease an extramarital affair with a direct subordinate in May 2022, according to Garigen, but the affair continued until December, when Garigen approached him again, and beyond. For example, Garigen believes that Soucia and this woman recently went on a “romantic trip,” which he paid for with a work credit card.
“It has had and continues to have a devastating effect on office morale,” says Garigen.
Finally, Garigen argues that Soucia omitted to disclose that he is facing a DUI arrest when he applied to renew his CPA license with the state Education Department.
Overall, Garigen requests that the court order Soucia to make Dansa D’Arata whole and to either remove Soucia from the partnership or dissolve the partnership. Soucia and his attorney responded that Garigen confronted them on Jan. 30 with a draft petition that he threatened to file publicly if Soucia did not step down as managing partner.
“Garigen’s petition and tactics are nothing more than an unlawful power grab,”
In an affidavit, Soucia stated.
“Ritter reported that Soucia refused to resign in response to the “extortion,” but agreed to a “short cooling off period,” working from home for several days while attorneys examined the situation.
Instead, Garigen filed the case on February 2nd.
Much of the alleged misbehavior occurred before Garigen agreed to join Soucia in purchasing the company.
Garigen, according to Ritter, is only now voicing concerns about Soucia because the partners obtained a letter of intent to purchase 75% of Dansa D’Arata on Jan. 25 for $12 million, which is quadruple the amount the partners paid 13 months ago.
Soucia stated in his affidavit that Garigen and other firm workers, including Garigen’s wife, had access to 401(k) documents and were well-versed in how the account was administered.
Ritter continued, calling Garigen’s accusation “nothing more than a well-scripted, salacious tale devoid of supporting evidence and detached from the reality of how the partnership has operated.”
Soucia vehemently denied any involvement. According to Ritter, the allegations of misbehavior against other employees were “speculative” and “irrelevant” to the fundamental concerns at hand.
According to the lawyers, State Supreme Court Justice Emilio Colaiacovo granted Soucia’s motion to halt the litigation and transfer the subject to arbitration on Tuesday.
“The decision validates Mr. Soucia’s position throughout these early proceedings that the petition should never have been filed,” Ritter explained in an email.
The judge also denied Garigen’s plea to temporarily remove Soucia as managing partner of the firm.
Colaiacovo did issue a number of orders, including limiting the use of business credit cards for personal purchases, prohibiting certain workplace behavior, and permitting independent counsel to study the 401(k) fund and provide management recommendations. The “limited” guidelines, according to Ritter, apply to all employees, and Soucia supports the independent evaluation of the retirement account.
Gwitt declined to comment on the court proceedings on Tuesday, but said his client wants to reassure clients that “these business issues between the partners are not impacting client services.”
What is a Power Grab
The attempt or action of acquiring or accomplishing something that was previously unattainable but is now possible through newly acquired power?
What is Power Harassment?
Power harassment is a type of workplace harassment and bullying in which someone in a position of higher power utilizes that status to harass or abuse someone in a lower-ranking position. It encompasses a wide spectrum of conduct, from minor irritations and annoyances to significant abuses that may include compelled activity outside the scope of the job description.
Power harassment is prohibited in several nations and is considered a form of political and psychological abuse. Physical or psychological assaults, segregation, excessive or unpleasant job assignments, and intrusion into the victim’s personal life are all examples of power harassment. Power harassment can be combined with other types of bigotry and harassment, such as sexual harassment.
Power harassment is distinguished in the context of sexual harassment from contra-power harassment, in which the harasser is of a lower rank than the victim, and peer harassment, in which the victim and harasser are of the same rank.
Ramona Rush created the term “political power harassment” in a 1993 dissertation on sexual harassment in academia. Political power harassment is difficult to analyze since it serves to strengthen and justify an existing hierarchy.
