ShareThis Page

Ex-LeNature's chief, wife of Ligonier sued

| Saturday, April 28, 2012, 12:58 a.m.

A North Carolina-based millwork company is suing Gregory Podlucky of Ligonier again for work the firm did at a sprawling mansion he was building off Route 711.

Zepsa Industries Inc. of Charlotte this week filed a lawsuit against Podlucky and his wife, Karla, seeking more than $624,000 for work the company did installing custom-built cabinets and finishing work at the home Podlucky was building with company funds allegedly siphoned from LeNature's Inc.

Podlucky claimed the mansion was a company training center but it was, in actuality, a luxurious home that Podlucky planned to live in, according to court records.

Podlucky commissioned more than $3 million in woodwork for the home, but the work was cut short when LeNature's was forced into bankruptcy in November 2006. Payments to Zepsa were stopped because of the litigation.

The lawsuit accuses the Podluckys of breach of contract and unjust enrichment.

Zepsa had sued the Podluckys in 2007 but the bankruptcy negated the lawsuit. The property is in possession of bankruptcy trustee Marc Kirschner, who likely will sell the home to help pay off LeNature's huge debts.

Kirschner filed a lawsuit against Zepsa in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Pittsburgh seeking the return of more than $1.1 million the Podluckys paid to the company alleging the payments were a fraudulent conveyance.

Kirschner charged that some of the money paid to Zepsa was while LeNature's was insolvent.

The suit was settled in May, which allowed Zepsa to refile its lawsuit in Westmoreland County.

Podlucky and other former company officials are under investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Pittsburgh in money laundering and bank, wire and mail fraud, according to court filings.

A grand jury has been investigating their roles in the financial collapse of the company, which was nearly $1 billion in debt when it folded.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me