Pinnacle Electric, the New York City electrical contractor operating through Agir Electrical, Ltd. and Pinnacle Too, LLC under owner Antony Gironta, is tied up in a cluster of lawsuits on nearly every side of its business. The active Pinnacle Electric lawsuits include a wage theft class action by its own workers now moving toward settlement, a $2.6 million consent judgment already entered in favor of a supplier, an ongoing payment fight with Tishman Construction, a trust fund case Pinnacle itself brought against Constrafor, and a new indemnity suit from surety Great Midwest Insurance seeking more than $2.8 million.
The Wage Theft Class Action
The largest employee-side case is Charles v. Pinnacle Too, LLC et al., filed in May 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by former electrician Dexlon Charles. The complaint alleges companywide practices that shorted journeymen electricians, laborers, technicians, and other non-exempt workers on wages across multiple job sites.
According to the complaint, Pinnacle “shaved” two to four hours per week from paychecks through arbitrary deductions and rounded start times forward to the nearest half hour, so a worker clocking in at 7:05 a.m. would be recorded as starting at 7:30 a.m. The company also allegedly auto-deducted 30-minute meal breaks even when workers had to keep working through lunch, and deducted 15-minute coffee breaks that Charles contended were compensable under federal and state law.
Charles also alleged he was fired in March 2022 in retaliation for complaining about missing wages and unsafe conditions, including asbestos exposure and inadequate safety equipment. The complaint described a “biased internal caste system” in which managers allegedly favored Trinidadian and Guyanese employees over Black and Hispanic workers in wages, promotions, and scheduling, and it accused supervisor Haron Khan of persistent sexual harassment of male employees that management ignored. The suit named the two Pinnacle entities, Gironta, and FrankCrum 6, Inc., a Florida-based professional employer organization that served as the employer of record for payroll while Pinnacle controlled work assignments.
Class Certification
In October 2024, the court granted class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) for the time-rounding, automatic meal-break deduction, and overtime/time-shaving claims, finding that common issues predominated. The court also denied the defendants’ motion to decertify the Fair Labor Standards Act collective. The court noted that certification is a procedural step and not a ruling on the merits.
Where the Case Stands Now
On February 2, 2026, the plaintiffs filed motions seeking conditional final approval of a class settlement, service awards for the named plaintiffs, and approval of attorney fees and costs. The same day, Judge Dale E. Ho signed an order sending the case to Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis for all further proceedings after the parties consented to magistrate jurisdiction. The specific settlement terms are not detailed in the available record.
The $2.6 Million Cooper Electric Supply Judgment
Pinnacle’s fastest-moving case ended with a large number against it. In April 2025, materials supplier Cooper Electric Supply, LLC sued Agir Electrical and Gironta personally in the Southern District of New York for breach of contract. By September 23, 2025, the court entered a consent judgment against both defendants, jointly and severally, for $2.6 million. The case was terminated the same day.
The Tishman Construction Payment Fight
Pinnacle is also pushing to collect money it says it is owed. In July 2022, it subcontracted with Tishman Construction Corporation for electrical work at 32 West 48th Street in Manhattan. Tishman terminated the subcontract effective December 27, 2024. On January 8, 2025, Pinnacle served a demand under New York’s Lien Law § 76 seeking a verified accounting of the project’s trust funds and asserting it was owed $1,000,206.19 for work done before termination.
Tishman moved to quash. It argued the demand was premature because the termination clause delayed remaining payments until all outstanding work was finished, and that Pinnacle had forfeited trust beneficiary status by assigning its payment rights to a surety under a November 2024 fund-control agreement.
Justice Gerald Lebovits of the New York County Supreme Court rejected both arguments in a July 2025 ruling. The court held that Pinnacle remained a trust beneficiary under Lien Law § 71(4) and that contract provisions attempting to delay or restrict a subcontractor’s statutory rights under Article 3-A are void as a matter of public policy. Tishman was ordered to respond to the demand within 14 days.
The Constrafor Case
In March 2025, Pinnacle filed suit against Constrafor Inc., its principal Anwar Ghauche, and CL Factoring LLC in the New York County Supreme Court’s Commercial Division. Pinnacle sued both on its own behalf and as a trustee for beneficiaries under Lien Law Article 3-A, with filings referencing a “Spreadsheet of Diversions” that points to allegations of misappropriated trust funds. The case was assigned to Judge James E. d’Auguste and has generated motions to dismiss, motions for partial summary judgment, and a motion to intervene. It remained open as of mid-2026 with no reported ruling on the merits.
The Great Midwest Surety Lawsuit
The biggest dollar exposure is a recent filing where Pinnacle and Gironta are defendants. On May 11, 2026, Great Midwest Insurance Company sued in the Eastern District of New York seeking to recover more than $2.8 million it says it has already paid on Pinnacle’s behalf, with potentially millions more at stake.
The dispute grew out of a subcontract Pinnacle held with Leeding Builders Group for electrical work at 125 West 57th Street in Manhattan. Great Midwest issued a performance bond and a payment bond in December 2022, each for $13,999,000, after the defendants signed a general agreement of indemnity in July 2022. The surety began paying claims after receiving notices of default in November 2024.
The complaint tallies $2,612,463.83 in paid losses, $144,980 in accounting and consulting costs, and $83,943 in attorney fees, for a total exceeding $2.84 million. Another $870,765 in claims remains under review, and total payment bond exposure stands at $11,157,614. Great Midwest says it demanded $2,040,000 in collateral from the defendants in October 2025 and received nothing. The defendants filed an answer on May 29, 2026. The case is active before Chief Magistrate Judge Vera M. Scanlon, with no preliminary relief motions filed as of the most recent docket entries.
Older Regulatory and Legal History
Pinnacle’s record predates the current cluster of suits. In February 2010, an individual filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board against Agir Enterprises, Ltd. d/b/a Pinnacle Electric alleging retaliation, discharge, and discipline in violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act. The Brooklyn regional office processed the case, which is now closed; the public record does not detail how it was resolved.
OSHA has cited the company at least twice. A 2007 complaint-driven inspection produced a “serious” violation with a $1,125 penalty. In December 2015, at 133 Greenwich Street in lower Manhattan, OSHA found the company had failed to determine whether energized electrical circuits posed a contact hazard. That serious citation carried an initial $6,300 penalty, reduced to $4,700 in an informal settlement. Corrective measures were completed by June 2016.
Both Pinnacle entities operate from the same Richmond Hill, Queens address under Gironta’s control, functioning as what the Charles complaint described as a “single integrated enterprise” with shared policies, human resources, and a common website.