Kriger Construction Lawsuit: Triboro Suit and Wage Class Action

Kriger Construction Inc., a heavy construction firm based in Archbald, Pennsylvania, is at the center of a Kriger Construction lawsuit filed in August 2025 seeking more than $71 million from Charles DeNaples, the Sansone Group, and related entities over allegations the company was frozen out of a warehouse site-work contract after submitting the lowest bid. That case is the largest in a string of legal disputes involving the company over the past several years, spanning a Northampton County bridge contract fight, an overtime wage class action, a tortious interference suit brought against Kriger, and a federal surety bond case.

The $71 Million Triboro Industrial Park Suit

On August 6, 2025, Kriger Construction and its affiliate NEPACA LLC sued Charles DeNaples, Triboro Industrial Park LLC, DeNaples’ agent Richard W. Evans, Sansone Group LLC, and several Sansone-affiliated limited liability companies in Lackawanna County Court. The complaint alleges intentional interference with a prospective contract and fraudulent inducement tied to the Triboro Industrial Park, a four-warehouse, roughly 562-acre development in Olyphant, Pennsylvania, planned to hold more than 4.5 million square feet of warehouse space.¹

Kriger seeks $61.2 million. NEPACA seeks about $10.5 million. Combined, the plaintiffs are asking for roughly $71.7 million. They are represented by attorneys at the Harrisburg firm McNees Wallace & Nurick.¹

What the Complaint Alleges

According to the suit, DeNaples, the managing member of Triboro Industrial Park LLC and son of Keystone Sanitary Landfill co-owner Dominick DeNaples, asked Kriger to bid on site preparation around early 2022. The scope covered earthwork, storm drainage, paving, curbing, utility installations, interior roadways, and entrance roads. Kriger submitted the lowest bid and spent years working with DeNaples and general contractor ARCO to market the property to potential buyers, revising its proposal multiple times.¹

On March 28, 2025, ARCO sent Kriger a signed letter of intent promising it the site-work contract. The complaint says that on June 12, ARCO told Kriger that DeNaples had “forbidden Sansone from awarding the sitework to Kriger” and had threatened to refuse to sell the land to Sansone if the developer gave Kriger the job. ARCO retracted the letter of intent on July 1 and paid Kriger $400,000 for geotechnical reports, an amount the suit says was owed under a prior agreement requiring that payment if Sansone failed to close on a lot or award the project.¹

The complaint also alleges that DeNaples’ agent, Richard W. Evans, told Kriger representatives that if anyone from the company was caught on the project site, that person “would be shot.”¹

Why NEPACA Is Also Suing

NEPACA LLC operates the NEPA Concrete & Asphalt plant at 99 Power Blvd. in Archbald, the same address as Kriger. Under Kriger’s original bid, excess rock from site preparation would have gone to NEPACA, and NEPACA would have supplied asphalt and concrete for the project. With Kriger excluded, NEPACA says it lost about $10.5 million in expected revenue.¹

As of the Times-Tribune’s September 2025 report, attempts to reach DeNaples and the Sansone Group for comment were unsuccessful, and no public rulings or answers in the case had been reported.¹

The Northampton County Bridge Contract Fight

Before the Triboro case, Kriger’s most visible dispute involved a public-private partnership to repair or replace 33 county-owned bridges in Northampton County. The project began in January 2017 under a $37.5 million service agreement with the Northampton County General Purpose Authority and ran into trouble by late 2019.

In November 2019, the Authority voted unanimously to find Kriger in default, citing missed deadlines. Kriger’s counsel said the delays came from utility relocations and right-of-way problems outside the company’s control, and said the Authority owed Kriger roughly $3.2 million. On the same day it issued the default notice, the Authority approved a $1.5 million milestone payment to Kriger, an effort to head off a counter-default claim.²

In November 2020, the Authority filed suit in Northampton County Court after eight bridges were removed from the original scope. It sought a $6.8 million contract credit for the removed work, pointing to a provision entitling it to 100% of direct labor, material, and equipment costs plus financing costs. Kriger proposed a credit of roughly $3.2 million, saying it had already purchased supplies and incurred expenses on the original scope.³⁴ Work on the remaining bridges was expected to continue under the original agreement. A final resolution of the lawsuit is not reflected in the available record.

The $475,000 Overtime Wage Class Action

In Chase v. Kriger Construction, Inc. (No. 2021 CV 5174), 190 Kriger workers alleged the company violated the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act by excluding certain cash wages paid in lieu of fringe benefits from employees’ “regular rate” of pay when calculating overtime, resulting in underpaid time-and-a-half wages. On February 9, 2024, the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas granted final approval of a $475,000 settlement, calling the legal theory “innovative” and a matter of “first impression” under Pennsylvania law.⁵

American Asphalt Paving’s Tortious Interference Suit

Kriger was the defendant in a tortious interference case brought by American Asphalt Paving Co. over a 2019 PennDOT project. American Asphalt alleged that Kriger threatened litigation against PennDOT over procurement code violations, causing the agency to halt and re-bid a contract that had already been awarded to American Asphalt. The trial court granted Kriger summary judgment, but in 2024 the Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed, finding genuine issues of material fact on Kriger’s intent and on whether its threat of litigation was a legitimate exercise of its rights, and sent the case back for further proceedings.⁶

The Arch Insurance Surety Bond Case

Arch Insurance Company filed a breach of contract action against Kriger Construction and the Kriger Construction Inc. Irrevocable Trust Agreement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in November 2022 (Case No. 2:22-cv-04444), involving surety bond obligations. The court granted Arch Insurance’s motion for summary judgment in June 2025. The parties later filed a stipulation of dismissal, and the case was closed with prejudice on April 28, 2026.⁷

1
The Times-Tribune. Kriger Construction Sues DeNaples, Warehouse Developer Over Industrial Park
2
Lehigh Valley Live. With Projects at a Standstill, Northampton County Finds Rapid Repair Bridge Contractor in Default
3
Engineering News-Record. Lawsuit Marks Pennsylvania County’s Souring Bridge P3 Experience
4
Lehigh Valley Live. Northampton County Authority Says Bridge Contractor Owes It $6.8M
5
Goodley McCarthy LLC. Goodley McCarthy Obtains Final Approval of $475,000 Settlement
6
Studicata. American Asphalt Paving Company v. Kriger Construction
7
PACER Monitor. Arch Insurance Company v. Kriger Construction, Inc. et al