Source-linked public-record research into lawsuits, outcomes, related proceedings, court rulings, public statements and litigation chronology.
Public statement source · YT765
SCAMMED ANOTHER $3000!? Hot Dogs and Sausage this week! Eggs restock soon!
This is the most substantive thing in my slice. It does four things at once, and each is separately useful. (1) It confirms a filing he made — "i filed a case in supreme court" — which is Filing announced or confirmed. (2) It names the court: New York Supreme Court, which the archive did not previously have for this matter. (3) It names a second, entirely separate proceeding running against him: an eviction filed by the landlord's lawyers in Bronx Housing Court, with an appearance he puts at "next monday or something." ⚠ Bronx Housing Court appears nowhere else in this archive — a grep of every file under youtube-research/videos/ for "housing court" returns zero. (4) It alleges forum influence: "the guy is so connected to this area that he got a court date in like a week which is crazy to me" — an assertion that the opposing party's local connections produced favourable scheduling, which is Judicial or forum bias alleged in its ordinary form (a complaint about how the forum treated him, not about a named judge). ⚠ Moderate, not Strong, for two reasons that both have to hold: neither factor here is one of the three core factors, and no tracked case is named — the Supreme Court action is not in lawsuits.csv at all. Possible case/dispute link: the untracked landlord matter recorded on YT053; NOT any row in lawsuits.csv. The identification is unusually solid for an unnamed-party link, because the archive already holds the other half of it: XYE8qZLgK3I ("SUING MY LANDLORD!? Frankie's Free Range Meat Update", published 2022-06-01, dataset row YT053, tagged primary_topic: Landlord litigation with external_matter: Older landlord dispute not currently represented in CASES) carries VS019 — "the most recent one last week a landlord terminated my lease called up the fire department to try to get me a violation and i was very irritated the day after that i filed the lawsuit immediately had him serve the papers" — and VS022, the neighbour-smell/shared-HVAC grievance that this video restates almost word for word at [6:16]. This video is 34 days later (2022-06-01 → 2022-07-05, computed in code) and is the next instalment of the same matter. ⚠ It is not C089. I considered and rejected reading "i filed a case in supreme court" as C089 (Frankies Free Range Meat LLC et al v. Adam Starowicz, Westchester County Supreme, filed 2021-04-22 and still live on this date): the sentence attributes the Housing Court response to the same actor — "he had his lawyers file a case" — and that actor is expressly "the landlord," whereas Starowicz is the LLC's 49% member, not the landlord. VS019 independently dates a landlord suit he filed in late May 2022. Both readings were checked; only one survives.
Evidentiary treatment: This is a public statement by a party, indexed separately from court findings, party filings and this project’s research classifications. Quotations below are transcribed from the video’s own YouTube auto-generated captions and timestamped from the caption cues covering the passage quoted; each links back to that exact moment so a reader can verify it. Auto-captions are machine-generated and mis-transcribe names and figures, so wording is preserved as transcribed rather than silently corrected. No transcript is reproduced here, and neither the video’s inclusion nor its relevance tier is a judicial finding.
Timestamped statements
What these tiers are: “Strong”, “Moderate” and “Context” are this project’s research classification of how closely a public statement bears on the documented filing-restriction indicators. They are not judicial findings, not an adjudication of anything said in a video, and not a determination that Frank Tufano is a vexatious litigant — no court in this dataset has made that determination. Court findings, party statements and research classifications are kept in separate evidence layers throughout this site; see Methodology.
How a tier is assigned.Strong — the statement names a tracked case or dispute and describes filing conduct of the kind the indicators document: repeat filing on the same dispute, filing after an adverse decision, or filing framed as imposing cost on the opponent. Moderate — it bears on litigation conduct or chronology in a tracked dispute, but the case link is tentative or the statement describes something other than the speaker’s own filing behaviour. Context — general commentary with no specific tracked case identified.
What the factor labels are. Each statement is also labelled with the filing-restriction factor its own words describe, so the reason for a classification is visible rather than implied. Most factors correspond to a criterion recorded in the indicator data, and the three that do not are marked as such there — a filing that has only been threatened has no docket to record, and an allegation about a court is the speaker’s characterisation rather than a recorded criterion. Repeat filing on the same dispute, filing after an adverse decision and cost imposition as stated motive are the three that can qualify a statement as Strong; threatened or prospective filing, self-reported filing volume, filing announced or confirmed, adverse outcome described and judicial or forum bias alleged record related but weaker signals. A statement that describes no filing conduct carries no factor badge. A factor records what the speaker said — not that a court found it, and not that anyone has been determined a vexatious litigant.
How quotations are marked: An ellipsis (…) inside a quotation marks words left out between two passages of the same video, which can sit some minutes apart. The omitted wording is not reproduced here, and a clip on the statement supercut plays the whole span from the quotation’s first word to its last — so it includes the omitted material. Quotations without an ellipsis are continuous speech.
the small one is i have this deli slicer and the legs broke off the guy i purchased it from said he's gonna fix it it's been like four weeks now i've called the guy every single day to come fix it and he still hasn't done it bigger issue is i gave an hvac guy a 3 000 deposit one job was to fix the condensation leak from the air conditioning system which he still hasn't come to do so my guys are sitting here you know either hot with this off or you know they're comfortable but this stuff is dripping all over the floor every single day three weeks now called him every single day too said he's come and said he's coming hasn't showed up
Two contractor/supplier grievances stated on the same day, neither of which has become a filing. The HVAC deposit is what the title calls being "SCAMMED ANOTHER $3000" — money paid up front for a condensation-leak repair and a vent fix, followed by three weeks of non-appearance. The deli slicer is a used-equipment grievance of exactly the shape later pleaded in C096: something bought from a seller, broken, and the seller undertaking to fix it and not doing so. It describes no filing conduct at all — he is complaining, not suing, and does not threaten to — so No filing-conduct factor is exact. ⚠ It is emphatically not Cost imposition as stated motive: the cost here is being imposed on him, by non-performance, and no filing of any kind is named as an instrument. Possible case/dispute link: none confirmed; two open leads, both with the party deliberately left open. (1) C096 (Frank Tufano v. Fernando Gil et al, N.Y. Sup. Ct. Bronx County 805063/2025E, filed 2025-03-04) pleads that Gil, "leveraging a prior business relationship," sold restaurant equipment represented as operational which did not work. The deli-slicer complaint here is the same grievance shape, 973 days before that filing (2022-07-05 → 2025-03-04, computed in code) — and the premises in this video are in the Bronx, the county C096 was later filed in. ⚠ But no name is spoken ("the guy i purchased it from"), a deli slicer is not among the three items C096 actually pleads (a Garland tilt skillet, a Hobart band saw, a Hollymatic patty machine), and a used-equipment seller in the Bronx is not necessarily Gil. Unproven, and must stay so. (2) ⚠ C002 / C077 (Tufano v. Crispino; Crispino's Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Inc) is the only HVAC/refrigeration party in the dataset and I checked it deliberately — declined: C002 concerns the Carbondale, Pennsylvania premises, its engagement is dated to December 2022 by the Stipulation Against Liens, which is five months after this video, and this contractor is working on a New York building he is simultaneously being evicted from. Same trade, wrong state, wrong date.
Moderate pattern relevanceFiling announced or confirmedJudicial or forum bias alleged05:42
on top of that the landlord filed his own lawsuit in bronx housing court and the guy is so connected to this area that he got a court date in like a week which is crazy to me because i filed a case in supreme court they didn't respond to the supreme court case instead he had his lawyers file a case in bronx housing court to try to evict me and now i got to go there next monday or something to see what's going on
This is the most substantive thing in my slice. It does four things at once, and each is separately useful. (1) It confirms a filing he made — "i filed a case in supreme court" — which is Filing announced or confirmed. (2) It names the court: New York Supreme Court, which the archive did not previously have for this matter. (3) It names a second, entirely separate proceeding running against him: an eviction filed by the landlord's lawyers in Bronx Housing Court, with an appearance he puts at "next monday or something." ⚠ Bronx Housing Court appears nowhere else in this archive — a grep of every file under youtube-research/videos/ for "housing court" returns zero. (4) It alleges forum influence: "the guy is so connected to this area that he got a court date in like a week which is crazy to me" — an assertion that the opposing party's local connections produced favourable scheduling, which is Judicial or forum bias alleged in its ordinary form (a complaint about how the forum treated him, not about a named judge). ⚠ Moderate, not Strong, for two reasons that both have to hold: neither factor here is one of the three core factors, and no tracked case is named — the Supreme Court action is not in lawsuits.csv at all. Possible case/dispute link: the untracked landlord matter recorded on YT053; NOT any row in lawsuits.csv. The identification is unusually solid for an unnamed-party link, because the archive already holds the other half of it: XYE8qZLgK3I ("SUING MY LANDLORD!? Frankie's Free Range Meat Update", published 2022-06-01, dataset row YT053, tagged primary_topic: Landlord litigation with external_matter: Older landlord dispute not currently represented in CASES) carries VS019 — "the most recent one last week a landlord terminated my lease called up the fire department to try to get me a violation and i was very irritated the day after that i filed the lawsuit immediately had him serve the papers" — and VS022, the neighbour-smell/shared-HVAC grievance that this video restates almost word for word at [6:16]. This video is 34 days later (2022-06-01 → 2022-07-05, computed in code) and is the next instalment of the same matter. ⚠ It is not C089. I considered and rejected reading "i filed a case in supreme court" as C089 (Frankies Free Range Meat LLC et al v. Adam Starowicz, Westchester County Supreme, filed 2021-04-22 and still live on this date): the sentence attributes the Housing Court response to the same actor — "he had his lawyers file a case" — and that actor is expressly "the landlord," whereas Starowicz is the LLC's 49% member, not the landlord. VS019 independently dates a landlord suit he filed in late May 2022. Both readings were checked; only one survives.
before neighbor complained about the smell and the management lack of communication has gotten to the point where their solution now is to try to get me kicked out probably because he just wants to raise the rent as rents have gone up a lot over the past uh past year year and a half he could probably get double what i'm paying in
His own statement of what the landlord matter is about — a neighbouring tenant's complaint about the smell from a meat business, management's failure to communicate, and his attribution of a rent-raising motive to the eviction. It bears on the chronology and substance of a proceeding, but describes no filing conduct of his own, hence No filing-conduct factor. It corroborates and extends the existing dataset row VS022 from XYE8qZLgK3I ("neighbor next door is complaining about the smell i don't know why the landlord leased a carpet rug company next to a meat company… the hvac systems in the building are connected and the landlord doesn't want to spend 15 20 000 whatever it is to get proper ventilation"), published 34 days earlier — and note that the vent fix the absent HVAC contractor was paid for ([5:09], "a part to fix the vent system so it doesn't smell as much in my neighbor's place") is the same smell problem, which ties the two grievances in this video to each other. Possible case/dispute link: the same untracked landlord matter as the first quote (YT053); not any row in lawsuits.csv. ⚠ The quote's first word, "before," is the tail of the preceding sentence ("you guys know the story i've talked about it before") and is included only because it falls inside the opening caption cue; a clip should be understood as starting at "neighbor complained about the smell."
A case link records a researched connection between the video and a docket record. It is not a finding that the video caused, or was caused by, any filing.
55177/2021 — FRANKIES FREE RANGE MEAT LLC et al v. ADAM STAROWICZTranscript reference · Medium · Timestamped statement at 05:42 researched as bearing on this case: [5:42]–[6:09] — Two proceedings at once: he confirms he filed in Supreme Court, and says the landlord answered by filing an eviction in Bronx Housing Court with a court date "in like a week" because "the guy is so connected to this area".