Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
EXHIBIT "B"
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK Index No.:
----------------------------------------------------------------------X
JULIET CHIN, Filed:
Plaintiff, Plaintiff designates
New York County as the
-against- Place of Trial
LONG ISLAND RAILROAD, SUMMONS
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,
NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, The basis of venue is:
MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT, and Lex Loci
CITY OF NEW YORK, New York Penn Station
351 West 31st Street,
Defendants. New York, NY 10001
----------------------------------------------------------------------X
To the above-named Defendants:
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve
a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this Summons, to served a notice of
appearance, in the Plaintiff’s Attorney(s) within 20 days after the service of this Summons,
exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this Summons is
not personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and if you fail to appear or answer,
judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint.
Dated: New York, New York
May 21, 2021
POLLACK, POLLACK, ISAAC & DECICCO
By: __________________________
Matthew D. Goodstein
Attorneys for Plaintiff
225 Broadway, Third Floor
New York, New York 10007
(212) 608-3734
(646) 287-1222 - fax
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
Defendants’ Addresses:
LONG ISLAND RAILROAD, 93-02 Sutphin Blvd., Jamaica, NY 11435
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, 2 Broadway, New York, NY
10004
NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, 130 Livingston Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201
MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT, 130 Livingston Street, Brooklyn, New York 11201
CITY OF NEW YORK, c/o New York City Law Department, 100 Church Street, New York,
NY 10007
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------------X
JULIET CHIN,
Index No.:
Plaintiff,
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
-against-
LONG ISLAND RAILROAD,
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,
NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY,
MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT, and
CITY OF NEW YORK,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------X
Plaintiff JULIET CHIN, by her attorneys, POLLACK POLLACK ISAAC & DECICCO,
as and for her Verified Complaint, at all times hereinafter mentioned, upon information and belief,
alleges as follows:
1. Plaintiff JULIET CHIN is a resident of County of Queens, City and State of New
York.
2. Defendant LONG ISLAND RAILROAD (hereinafter “LIRR”) is a public authority
corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.
3. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant LIRR transacted business in New York
State.
4. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant LIRR maintained a principal place of
business in New York State.
5. Defendant METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (hereinafter
“MTA”) is a public authority corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the
laws of the State of New York.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
6. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant MTA transacted business in New York
State.
7. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant MTA maintained a principal place of
business in New York State.
8. Defendant NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY (hereinafter “NYCTA”)
is a public authority corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the
State of New York.
9. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant NYCTA transacted business in New York
State.
10. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant NYCTA maintained a principal place of
business in New York State.
11. Defendant MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT (hereinafter “MTA-NYCT”) is a
public authority corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the
State of New York.
12. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant MTA-NYCT transacted business in New
York State.
13. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant MTA-NYCT maintained a principal
place of business in New York State.
14. Defendant CITY OF NEW YORK (hereinafter “CITY”) is a public authority
corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.
15. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant CITY transacted business in New York
State.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
16. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant CITY maintained a principal place of
business in New York State.
17. That within 90 days of the occurrence, a Notice of Claim was duly served upon
Defendants setting forth the time, date, place, and manner in which the claim arose.
18. That more than 30 days have elapsed from the presentation of the claim against
Defendants and the claim remains unsettled and or otherwise unadjusted.
19. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant LIRR owned the real property located at or near
351 West 31st Street, New York, NY, commonly referred to as New York Penn Station (hereinafter
“the property”).
20. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR managed the property.
21. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR maintained the property.
22. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR controlled the property.
23. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR operated the property.
24. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR derived revenue through the use of the
property.
25. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant LIRR had a non-delegable duty to
maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition.
26. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR permitted a tripping hazard to
exist at the property.
27. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR permitted a tripping hazard to
exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property.
28. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant MTA owned the property.
29. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA managed the property.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
30. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA maintained the property.
31. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA controlled the property.
32. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA operated the property.
33. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA derived revenue through the use of the
property.
34. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant MTA had a non-delegable duty to
maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition.
35. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA permitted a tripping hazard to
exist at the property.
36. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA permitted a tripping hazard to
exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property.
37. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant NYCTA owned the property.
38. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA managed the property.
39. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA maintained the property.
40. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA controlled the property.
41. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA operated the property.
42. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA derived revenue through the use of
the property.
43. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant NYCTA had a non-delegable duty to
maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition.
44. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA permitted a tripping hazard
to exist at the property.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
45. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA permitted a tripping hazard
to exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property.
46. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant MTA-NYCT owned the property.
47. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT managed the property.
48. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT maintained the property.
49. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT controlled the property.
50. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT operated the property.
51. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT derived revenue through the use
of the property.
52. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant MTA-NYCT had a non-delegable duty
to maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition.
53. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT permitted a tripping
hazard to exist at the property.
54. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT permitted a tripping
hazard to exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property.
55. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant CNY owned the property.
56. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY managed the property.
57. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY maintained the property.
58. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY controlled the property.
59. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY operated the property.
60. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY derived revenue through the use of the
property.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
61. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant CNY had a non-delegable duty to
maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition.
62. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY permitted a tripping hazard to
exist at the property.
63. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY permitted a tripping hazard to
exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property.
64. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was lawfully upon the property.
65. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a
defective condition at or on the property.
66. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to the
defective condition of a stairway at or on the property.
67. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a
raised or uneven edge of a tread on a stairway at the property.
68. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a
raised or uneven edge of a tread on the stairway marked M6A at the property.
69. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a
defective condition of a floor at or on the property.
70. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a
defective condition on the floor at or near a stairway at the property.
71. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a
defective condition at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property.
72. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff sustained personal injuries.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
73. The aforesaid accident and the resulting injuries sustained by the Plaintiff occurred
solely due to the fault of Defendants.
74. The aforesaid accident and the resulting injuries sustained by the Plaintiff occurred
solely due to the fault of the Defendants in the ownership, operation, maintenance, management
and/or control of the property.
75. The aforesaid accident and the resulting injuries sustained by the Plaintiff occurred
solely due to the fault of the Defendants in the ownership, operation, maintenance, management
and/or control of the property in causing, creating, permitting and/or allowing a defective condition
to exist despite actual, constructive, and/or prior written notice of same.
76. That Plaintiff appeared for GML § 50H examination.
77. The aforesaid accident and the resulting injuries sustained by the Plaintiff occurred
through no fault or negligence of said Plaintiff.
78. The limitations on liability set forth in Article 16 of the CPLR do not apply by
reason of one or more exemptions set forth therein.
79. By reason of the foregoing, defendants are jointly and severally liable pursuant to
the exceptions set forth in the CPLR.
80. By reason of the foregoing, the plaintiff is entitled to recover all of her damages
properly recoverable under CPLR 3017(c).
81. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff has been damaged by Defendants in an amount
in excess of the jurisdictional limits of all Courts that could otherwise have jurisdiction over this
matter.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants in an amount in
excess of the jurisdictional limits of all Courts that could otherwise have jurisdiction over this
matter, together with interest, costs and disbursements of this action.
Dated: New York, New York
May 21, 2021
Yours, etc.,
POLLACK POLLACK ISAAC & DECICCO
By: _______________________
Matthew D. Goodstein
Attorneys for Plaintiff
225 Broadway, Third Floor
New York, New York 10007
(212) 608-3734
(646) 287-1222 - fax
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
ATTORNEY VERIFICATION
MATTHEW D. GOODSTEIN, an attorney admitted to practice law before the Courts of
the State of New York and attorney for the Plaintiff, affirms the following:
That I have read the foregoing VERIFIED COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof,
that the same is true to my own knowledge except as to those matters which are stated therein to
be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true.
That the information contained therein was obtained based upon a review of Plaintiff’s
legal case file.
That the reason this verification is made by your affirmant and not by the Plaintiff is
because the Plaintiff does not reside within New York County, where I maintain my office.
The undersigned affirms that the foregoing statement is true under the penalties of perjury.
Dated: New York, New York
May 21, 2021
___________________________
Matthew D. Goodstein
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK INDEX NO.
JULIET CHIN,
Plaintiff,
-against-
LONG ISLAND RAILROAD,
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,
NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY,
MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT, and
CITY OF NEW YORK,
Defendants.
SUMMONS AND VERIFIED COMPLAINT
POLLACK POLLACK ISAAC & DECICCO
Attorneys for Plaintiff
By: ___________________________
Matthew D. Goodstein
225 Broadway, Third Floor
New York, New York 10007
(212) 608-3734
(646) 287-1222 - fax
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 EXHIBIT "B" FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK Index No.: ----------------------------------------------------------------------X JULIET CHIN, Filed: Plaintiff, Plaintiff designates New York County as the -against- Place of Trial LONG ISLAND RAILROAD, SUMMONS METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, The basis of venue is: MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT, and Lex Loci CITY OF NEW YORK, New York Penn Station 351 West 31st Street, Defendants. New York, NY 10001 ----------------------------------------------------------------------X To the above-named Defendants: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this Summons, to served a notice of appearance, in the Plaintiff’s Attorney(s) within 20 days after the service of this Summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this Summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and if you fail to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint. Dated: New York, New York May 21, 2021 POLLACK, POLLACK, ISAAC & DECICCO By: __________________________ Matthew D. Goodstein Attorneys for Plaintiff 225 Broadway, Third Floor New York, New York 10007 (212) 608-3734 (646) 287-1222 - fax FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 Defendants’ Addresses: LONG ISLAND RAILROAD, 93-02 Sutphin Blvd., Jamaica, NY 11435 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, 2 Broadway, New York, NY 10004 NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, 130 Livingston Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201 MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT, 130 Livingston Street, Brooklyn, New York 11201 CITY OF NEW YORK, c/o New York City Law Department, 100 Church Street, New York, NY 10007 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------------------X JULIET CHIN, Index No.: Plaintiff, VERIFIED COMPLAINT -against- LONG ISLAND RAILROAD, METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT, and CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendants. ----------------------------------------------------------------------X Plaintiff JULIET CHIN, by her attorneys, POLLACK POLLACK ISAAC & DECICCO, as and for her Verified Complaint, at all times hereinafter mentioned, upon information and belief, alleges as follows: 1. Plaintiff JULIET CHIN is a resident of County of Queens, City and State of New York. 2. Defendant LONG ISLAND RAILROAD (hereinafter “LIRR”) is a public authority corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. 3. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant LIRR transacted business in New York State. 4. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant LIRR maintained a principal place of business in New York State. 5. Defendant METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (hereinafter “MTA”) is a public authority corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 6. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant MTA transacted business in New York State. 7. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant MTA maintained a principal place of business in New York State. 8. Defendant NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY (hereinafter “NYCTA”) is a public authority corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. 9. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant NYCTA transacted business in New York State. 10. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant NYCTA maintained a principal place of business in New York State. 11. Defendant MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT (hereinafter “MTA-NYCT”) is a public authority corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. 12. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant MTA-NYCT transacted business in New York State. 13. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant MTA-NYCT maintained a principal place of business in New York State. 14. Defendant CITY OF NEW YORK (hereinafter “CITY”) is a public authority corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. 15. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant CITY transacted business in New York State. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 16. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant CITY maintained a principal place of business in New York State. 17. That within 90 days of the occurrence, a Notice of Claim was duly served upon Defendants setting forth the time, date, place, and manner in which the claim arose. 18. That more than 30 days have elapsed from the presentation of the claim against Defendants and the claim remains unsettled and or otherwise unadjusted. 19. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant LIRR owned the real property located at or near 351 West 31st Street, New York, NY, commonly referred to as New York Penn Station (hereinafter “the property”). 20. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR managed the property. 21. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR maintained the property. 22. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR controlled the property. 23. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR operated the property. 24. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR derived revenue through the use of the property. 25. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant LIRR had a non-delegable duty to maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition. 26. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR permitted a tripping hazard to exist at the property. 27. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant LIRR permitted a tripping hazard to exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property. 28. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant MTA owned the property. 29. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA managed the property. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 30. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA maintained the property. 31. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA controlled the property. 32. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA operated the property. 33. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA derived revenue through the use of the property. 34. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant MTA had a non-delegable duty to maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition. 35. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA permitted a tripping hazard to exist at the property. 36. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA permitted a tripping hazard to exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property. 37. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant NYCTA owned the property. 38. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA managed the property. 39. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA maintained the property. 40. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA controlled the property. 41. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA operated the property. 42. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA derived revenue through the use of the property. 43. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant NYCTA had a non-delegable duty to maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition. 44. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA permitted a tripping hazard to exist at the property. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 45. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant NYCTA permitted a tripping hazard to exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property. 46. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant MTA-NYCT owned the property. 47. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT managed the property. 48. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT maintained the property. 49. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT controlled the property. 50. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT operated the property. 51. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT derived revenue through the use of the property. 52. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant MTA-NYCT had a non-delegable duty to maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition. 53. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT permitted a tripping hazard to exist at the property. 54. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant MTA-NYCT permitted a tripping hazard to exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property. 55. That on January 7, 2021 Defendant CNY owned the property. 56. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY managed the property. 57. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY maintained the property. 58. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY controlled the property. 59. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY operated the property. 60. That on January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY derived revenue through the use of the property. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 61. That at all times relevant herein, Defendant CNY had a non-delegable duty to maintain the property in a safe and hazard-free condition. 62. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY permitted a tripping hazard to exist at the property. 63. That on or before January 7, 2021, Defendant CNY permitted a tripping hazard to exist at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property. 64. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was lawfully upon the property. 65. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a defective condition at or on the property. 66. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to the defective condition of a stairway at or on the property. 67. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a raised or uneven edge of a tread on a stairway at the property. 68. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a raised or uneven edge of a tread on the stairway marked M6A at the property. 69. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a defective condition of a floor at or on the property. 70. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a defective condition on the floor at or near a stairway at the property. 71. That on or about January 7, 2021, Plaintiff was caused to trip and/or fall due to a defective condition at or near the stairway marked M6A at the property. 72. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff sustained personal injuries. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 73. The aforesaid accident and the resulting injuries sustained by the Plaintiff occurred solely due to the fault of Defendants. 74. The aforesaid accident and the resulting injuries sustained by the Plaintiff occurred solely due to the fault of the Defendants in the ownership, operation, maintenance, management and/or control of the property. 75. The aforesaid accident and the resulting injuries sustained by the Plaintiff occurred solely due to the fault of the Defendants in the ownership, operation, maintenance, management and/or control of the property in causing, creating, permitting and/or allowing a defective condition to exist despite actual, constructive, and/or prior written notice of same. 76. That Plaintiff appeared for GML § 50H examination. 77. The aforesaid accident and the resulting injuries sustained by the Plaintiff occurred through no fault or negligence of said Plaintiff. 78. The limitations on liability set forth in Article 16 of the CPLR do not apply by reason of one or more exemptions set forth therein. 79. By reason of the foregoing, defendants are jointly and severally liable pursuant to the exceptions set forth in the CPLR. 80. By reason of the foregoing, the plaintiff is entitled to recover all of her damages properly recoverable under CPLR 3017(c). 81. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff has been damaged by Defendants in an amount in excess of the jurisdictional limits of all Courts that could otherwise have jurisdiction over this matter. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants in an amount in excess of the jurisdictional limits of all Courts that could otherwise have jurisdiction over this matter, together with interest, costs and disbursements of this action. Dated: New York, New York May 21, 2021 Yours, etc., POLLACK POLLACK ISAAC & DECICCO By: _______________________ Matthew D. Goodstein Attorneys for Plaintiff 225 Broadway, Third Floor New York, New York 10007 (212) 608-3734 (646) 287-1222 - fax FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 ATTORNEY VERIFICATION MATTHEW D. GOODSTEIN, an attorney admitted to practice law before the Courts of the State of New York and attorney for the Plaintiff, affirms the following: That I have read the foregoing VERIFIED COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof, that the same is true to my own knowledge except as to those matters which are stated therein to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. That the information contained therein was obtained based upon a review of Plaintiff’s legal case file. That the reason this verification is made by your affirmant and not by the Plaintiff is because the Plaintiff does not reside within New York County, where I maintain my office. The undersigned affirms that the foregoing statement is true under the penalties of perjury. Dated: New York, New York May 21, 2021 ___________________________ Matthew D. Goodstein FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/24/2022 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 154992/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK INDEX NO. JULIET CHIN, Plaintiff, -against- LONG ISLAND RAILROAD, METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT, and CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendants. SUMMONS AND VERIFIED COMPLAINT POLLACK POLLACK ISAAC & DECICCO Attorneys for Plaintiff By: ___________________________ Matthew D. Goodstein 225 Broadway, Third Floor New York, New York 10007 (212) 608-3734 (646) 287-1222 - fax