Preview
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF BRONX
LEONARD J. CANORA,
Index No. 20816/2020
Plaintiff,
v. VERIFIED ANSWER
RAMBLING HOUSE INC. AND JOSEPH KRIPP,
Defendants.
Defendant, Rambling House Inc. (“Answering Defendant”), by its attorneys, CLARK &
FOX, as and for its Verified Answer to Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint alleges, upon information
and belief, as follows:
AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
ON BEHALF OF LEONARD J. CANORA
1. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of each
and every allegation set forth in paragraphs “1”, “3”, “5” and “13” of the Verified Complaint.
2. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “2” of the Verified
Complaint but admits that Answering Defendant was and is a domestic business corporation in the
State of New York.
3. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “4” of the Verified
Complaint and refers all questions of law to the Court.
4. Denies in the form alleged each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs “6”,
“9”, “10”, “11”, “12” and “16” of the Verified Complaint.
5. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs “7”, “14”, “17”, “18”,
“19”, “20”, “21” and “22” of the Verified Complaint.
6. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “8” of the Verified
Complaint but admits that Answering Defendant was and is a tenant at the premises located at
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
4292 Katonah Avenue, Bronx, New York 10470.
7. Denies in the form alleged each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “15” of
the Verified Complaint and refers all questions of law to the Court.
AS AND FOR A SECONDCAUSE OF ACTION
ON BEHALF OF LEONARD J. CANORA
8. Repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every response from paragraph “1”
through “22”, inclusive, of the Verified Complaint in answer to paragraph “23” of the Verified
Complaint, with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.
9. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs “24”, “25”, “27”, “28, “29”
and “30” of the Verified Complaint.
10. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “26” of the Verified
Complaint and refers all questions of law to the Court.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That if the accident, injuries and damages occurred as alleged by Plaintiff in his Verified
Complaint, said injured and/or damages were, in whole or in part, attributable to the culpable
conduct of the Plaintiff including, but not limited to, negligence, carelessness, recklessness and/or
assumption of risk.
By reason of the foregoing, Answering Defendant demands that any damages recovered or
any judgment recovered by Plaintiff against Answering Defendant be reduced accordingly,
pursuant to the common law and CPLR § 1411, in the proportion which the culpable conduct
attributable to Plaintiff bears to the culpable conduct, if any, of Answering Defendant.
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That if the injuries and/or damages and the risks incident to the situation mentioned in the
Verified Complaint were open, obvious and apparent, and were known and assumed by the
Plaintiff, then Plaintiff’s claims are barred by virtue of his assumption of the risks hereof.
AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
In the event Plaintiff recovers a verdict or judgment against Answering Defendant, then
said verdict or judgment must be reduced pursuant to CPLR 4545(c) by those amounts which have
been, or will, with reasonable certainty, replace or indemnify Plaintiff in whole or in part, for any
past or future claimed economic loss, from any collateral source such as insurance, social security,
workers’ compensation or employee benefit program.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Plaintiff has failed to mitigate, obviate, diminish and otherwise act to lessen or reduce
the alleged injuries, damages and disabilities alleged in the Verified Complaint.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That, to the extent that the alleged damages and/or injuries of Plaintiff, if any, were caused
or contributed to, in whole or in part, by intervening and superseding causative factors, the claims
of Plaintiff against Answering Defendant should be barred.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be
granted.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff has failed to join all necessary parties to this action.
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
If the Plaintiff was damaged as alleged in the Verified Complaint, which damages are
expressly denied, then such damages were the result, in whole or in part, of the conduct of the
Plaintiff and/or others over whom Answering Defendant exercised no influence or control; and, to
the extent that Answering Defendant may be liable to the Plaintiff, such liability should be in
proportion to the percentage that Answering Defendant’s conduct relates to the conduct of the
Plaintiff and/or others in causing the damage, and apportioned pursuant to Articles 14 and 16 of
the CPLR.
AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That the causes of action set forth in the Verified Complaint were not commenced within
the time of the applicable statute of limitations.
CROSS-CLAIMS
AS AND FOR FIRST CROSS-CLAIM
AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT JOSEPH KRIPP
1. That if Plaintiff was caused damages as alleged in the Verified Complaint
through negligence other than Plaintiff’s own negligence, carelessness and recklessness, said
damages were sustained due to the negligent, careless, and reckless acts of omission or
commission of the Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, with the negligence, if any, of Answering
Defendant being secondary and/or derivative only.
2. If the Plaintiff should recover judgment against Answering Defendant then the
Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, shall be liable to Answering Defendant for the full amount of said
judgment or on the basis of apportionment of responsibility for the alleged occurrence, and, as
such, Answering Defendant is entitled to contribution from and judgment over and against the
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, for its proportionate share of any verdict or judgment which
Plaintiff may recover in such amounts as a jury or Court may direct.
AS AND FOR A SECOND CROSS-CLAIM
AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT JOSEPH KRIPP
3. If Plaintiff sustained injuries and/or damages as alleged in the Verified Complaint
through any fault other than plaintiff’s own negligence, carelessness and recklessness, said
damages were sustained due to the sole primary and active negligent, careless, and reckless acts
of omission or commission of the Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, with the negligence, if any, of
Answering Defendant being secondary, passive and/or derivative only, and if the Plaintiff should
obtain and/or recover judgment against Answering Defendant then the Co-Defendant, Joseph
Kripp, shall be liable over to Answering Defendant for the full amount of said judgment on the
basis of common law indemnification.
AS AND FOR A THIRD CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST
CO-DEFENDANT JOSEPH KRIPP
4. Upon information and belief, Answering Defendant entered into a written
agreement with Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, by which Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, agreed to
indemnify and hold harmless Answering Defendant for all or part of all claims asserted by
Plaintiff.
5. The written agreement was in full force and effect on the date of the accident
alleged by Plaintiff.
6. Pursuant to said written agreement, Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, agreed to
defend, hold harmless and indemnify Answering Defendant from claims such as those asserted
by Plaintiff herein.
7. Pursuant to the written agreement, Answering Defendant is entitled to full
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
indemnification, defense and shall be held harmless regarding the Verified Complaint of the
Plaintiff.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH CROSS-CLAIM
AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT JOSEPH KRIP
8. The Answering Defendant repeats, reiterates and re-alleges, all claims set forth
in the preceding paragraphs as if set forth more fully at length herein.
9. Pursuant to the aforesaid written agreement, Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, was to
provide certain liability insurance to the benefit of Answering Defendant protecting Answering
Defendant for liability in a claim such as that brought by Plaintiff in this action.
10. Upon information and belief, Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, failed to provide
insurance coverage to the benefit of, and for the protection of Answering Defendant and shall be
liable over to Answering Defendant for all damages permitted under the law.
WHEREFORE, Defendant, Rambling House Inc., demands judgment dismissing the
Verified Complaint, together with cost and disbursements of this action.
Dated: New York, New York
April 7, 2020
CLARK & FOX
BY:
Megan K. Foster
575 5th Avenue, Floor 14
New York, NY 10017
Phone: (646) 506-4707
Fax: (646) 506-3777
Email: mfoster@clarkfoxlaw.com
Attorney for Defendant,
Rambling House Inc.
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
TO:
Richard E. Noll, Esquire
The Noll Law Firm PC
33 Queens Street, Ste 102
Syosset, NY 11791
Attorney for Plaintiff,
Leonard Canora
Joseph Kripp
178 Kimball Avenue
Yonkers, New York 10704
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
VERIFICATION
The Undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the State of New York, affirms the
truth of the following statements, upon information and belief and pursuant to the penalties of
perjury:
That I am a Partner of the firm of Clark & Fox, the attorneys of record for Defendant,
Rambling House Inc., in the within action, that I have read the foregoing Verified Answer to
Verified Complaint and know the contents thereof, that the same are true to affirmants, own
knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and believe, and as
to those matter affirmant believes them to be true.
That the reason this affirmation is made by counsel and not by the Defendant is the
Defendant is located outside the county in which its attorneys maintain their office.
The grounds of affirmant’s belief as to all matters not stated to be upon affirmant’s
knowledge are as follows: investigation, documents, correspondence, etc. contained in the file
maintained by this office.
Dated: New York, New York
April 7, 2020
Megan K. Foster
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF BRONX
LEONARD CANORA,
Plaintiff, Index No. 20816/2020
v.
RAMBLING HOUSE INC. AND
JOSEPH KRIPP,
Defendants.
VERIFIED ANSWER
Megan K. Foster, Esquire
CLARK & FOX
575 5th Avenue, Floor 14
New York, NY 10017
Phone: (646) 506-4707
Fax: (646) 506-3777
Email: mfoster@clarkfoxlaw.com
Preview
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF BRONX LEONARD J. CANORA, Index No. 20816/2020 Plaintiff, v. VERIFIED ANSWER RAMBLING HOUSE INC. AND JOSEPH KRIPP, Defendants. Defendant, Rambling House Inc. (“Answering Defendant”), by its attorneys, CLARK & FOX, as and for its Verified Answer to Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint alleges, upon information and belief, as follows: AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF LEONARD J. CANORA 1. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs “1”, “3”, “5” and “13” of the Verified Complaint. 2. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “2” of the Verified Complaint but admits that Answering Defendant was and is a domestic business corporation in the State of New York. 3. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “4” of the Verified Complaint and refers all questions of law to the Court. 4. Denies in the form alleged each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs “6”, “9”, “10”, “11”, “12” and “16” of the Verified Complaint. 5. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs “7”, “14”, “17”, “18”, “19”, “20”, “21” and “22” of the Verified Complaint. 6. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “8” of the Verified Complaint but admits that Answering Defendant was and is a tenant at the premises located at FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 4292 Katonah Avenue, Bronx, New York 10470. 7. Denies in the form alleged each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “15” of the Verified Complaint and refers all questions of law to the Court. AS AND FOR A SECONDCAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF LEONARD J. CANORA 8. Repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every response from paragraph “1” through “22”, inclusive, of the Verified Complaint in answer to paragraph “23” of the Verified Complaint, with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein. 9. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs “24”, “25”, “27”, “28, “29” and “30” of the Verified Complaint. 10. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph “26” of the Verified Complaint and refers all questions of law to the Court. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That if the accident, injuries and damages occurred as alleged by Plaintiff in his Verified Complaint, said injured and/or damages were, in whole or in part, attributable to the culpable conduct of the Plaintiff including, but not limited to, negligence, carelessness, recklessness and/or assumption of risk. By reason of the foregoing, Answering Defendant demands that any damages recovered or any judgment recovered by Plaintiff against Answering Defendant be reduced accordingly, pursuant to the common law and CPLR § 1411, in the proportion which the culpable conduct attributable to Plaintiff bears to the culpable conduct, if any, of Answering Defendant. FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That if the injuries and/or damages and the risks incident to the situation mentioned in the Verified Complaint were open, obvious and apparent, and were known and assumed by the Plaintiff, then Plaintiff’s claims are barred by virtue of his assumption of the risks hereof. AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE In the event Plaintiff recovers a verdict or judgment against Answering Defendant, then said verdict or judgment must be reduced pursuant to CPLR 4545(c) by those amounts which have been, or will, with reasonable certainty, replace or indemnify Plaintiff in whole or in part, for any past or future claimed economic loss, from any collateral source such as insurance, social security, workers’ compensation or employee benefit program. AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Plaintiff has failed to mitigate, obviate, diminish and otherwise act to lessen or reduce the alleged injuries, damages and disabilities alleged in the Verified Complaint. AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That, to the extent that the alleged damages and/or injuries of Plaintiff, if any, were caused or contributed to, in whole or in part, by intervening and superseding causative factors, the claims of Plaintiff against Answering Defendant should be barred. AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be granted. AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff has failed to join all necessary parties to this action. FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE If the Plaintiff was damaged as alleged in the Verified Complaint, which damages are expressly denied, then such damages were the result, in whole or in part, of the conduct of the Plaintiff and/or others over whom Answering Defendant exercised no influence or control; and, to the extent that Answering Defendant may be liable to the Plaintiff, such liability should be in proportion to the percentage that Answering Defendant’s conduct relates to the conduct of the Plaintiff and/or others in causing the damage, and apportioned pursuant to Articles 14 and 16 of the CPLR. AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That the causes of action set forth in the Verified Complaint were not commenced within the time of the applicable statute of limitations. CROSS-CLAIMS AS AND FOR FIRST CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT JOSEPH KRIPP 1. That if Plaintiff was caused damages as alleged in the Verified Complaint through negligence other than Plaintiff’s own negligence, carelessness and recklessness, said damages were sustained due to the negligent, careless, and reckless acts of omission or commission of the Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, with the negligence, if any, of Answering Defendant being secondary and/or derivative only. 2. If the Plaintiff should recover judgment against Answering Defendant then the Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, shall be liable to Answering Defendant for the full amount of said judgment or on the basis of apportionment of responsibility for the alleged occurrence, and, as such, Answering Defendant is entitled to contribution from and judgment over and against the FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, for its proportionate share of any verdict or judgment which Plaintiff may recover in such amounts as a jury or Court may direct. AS AND FOR A SECOND CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT JOSEPH KRIPP 3. If Plaintiff sustained injuries and/or damages as alleged in the Verified Complaint through any fault other than plaintiff’s own negligence, carelessness and recklessness, said damages were sustained due to the sole primary and active negligent, careless, and reckless acts of omission or commission of the Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, with the negligence, if any, of Answering Defendant being secondary, passive and/or derivative only, and if the Plaintiff should obtain and/or recover judgment against Answering Defendant then the Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, shall be liable over to Answering Defendant for the full amount of said judgment on the basis of common law indemnification. AS AND FOR A THIRD CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT JOSEPH KRIPP 4. Upon information and belief, Answering Defendant entered into a written agreement with Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, by which Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, agreed to indemnify and hold harmless Answering Defendant for all or part of all claims asserted by Plaintiff. 5. The written agreement was in full force and effect on the date of the accident alleged by Plaintiff. 6. Pursuant to said written agreement, Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, agreed to defend, hold harmless and indemnify Answering Defendant from claims such as those asserted by Plaintiff herein. 7. Pursuant to the written agreement, Answering Defendant is entitled to full FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 indemnification, defense and shall be held harmless regarding the Verified Complaint of the Plaintiff. AS AND FOR A FOURTH CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT JOSEPH KRIP 8. The Answering Defendant repeats, reiterates and re-alleges, all claims set forth in the preceding paragraphs as if set forth more fully at length herein. 9. Pursuant to the aforesaid written agreement, Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, was to provide certain liability insurance to the benefit of Answering Defendant protecting Answering Defendant for liability in a claim such as that brought by Plaintiff in this action. 10. Upon information and belief, Co-Defendant, Joseph Kripp, failed to provide insurance coverage to the benefit of, and for the protection of Answering Defendant and shall be liable over to Answering Defendant for all damages permitted under the law. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Rambling House Inc., demands judgment dismissing the Verified Complaint, together with cost and disbursements of this action. Dated: New York, New York April 7, 2020 CLARK & FOX BY: Megan K. Foster 575 5th Avenue, Floor 14 New York, NY 10017 Phone: (646) 506-4707 Fax: (646) 506-3777 Email: mfoster@clarkfoxlaw.com Attorney for Defendant, Rambling House Inc. FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 TO: Richard E. Noll, Esquire The Noll Law Firm PC 33 Queens Street, Ste 102 Syosset, NY 11791 Attorney for Plaintiff, Leonard Canora Joseph Kripp 178 Kimball Avenue Yonkers, New York 10704 FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 VERIFICATION The Undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the State of New York, affirms the truth of the following statements, upon information and belief and pursuant to the penalties of perjury: That I am a Partner of the firm of Clark & Fox, the attorneys of record for Defendant, Rambling House Inc., in the within action, that I have read the foregoing Verified Answer to Verified Complaint and know the contents thereof, that the same are true to affirmants, own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and believe, and as to those matter affirmant believes them to be true. That the reason this affirmation is made by counsel and not by the Defendant is the Defendant is located outside the county in which its attorneys maintain their office. The grounds of affirmant’s belief as to all matters not stated to be upon affirmant’s knowledge are as follows: investigation, documents, correspondence, etc. contained in the file maintained by this office. Dated: New York, New York April 7, 2020 Megan K. Foster FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/28/2021 12:21 PM INDEX NO. 20816/2020E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/28/2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF BRONX LEONARD CANORA, Plaintiff, Index No. 20816/2020 v. RAMBLING HOUSE INC. AND JOSEPH KRIPP, Defendants. VERIFIED ANSWER Megan K. Foster, Esquire CLARK & FOX 575 5th Avenue, Floor 14 New York, NY 10017 Phone: (646) 506-4707 Fax: (646) 506-3777 Email: mfoster@clarkfoxlaw.com