arrow left
arrow right
  • Jordy F. Ramirez , an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian,, Eugenio M. Ramirez , Individually, Rosalba Luna , Individually v. Rashmi Ambewadikar D.D.S., Metropolitan Dental Associates, D.D.S. - 225 Broadway, P.C Tort document preview
  • Jordy F. Ramirez , an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian,, Eugenio M. Ramirez , Individually, Rosalba Luna , Individually v. Rashmi Ambewadikar D.D.S., Metropolitan Dental Associates, D.D.S. - 225 Broadway, P.C Tort document preview
  • Jordy F. Ramirez , an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian,, Eugenio M. Ramirez , Individually, Rosalba Luna , Individually v. Rashmi Ambewadikar D.D.S., Metropolitan Dental Associates, D.D.S. - 225 Broadway, P.C Tort document preview
  • Jordy F. Ramirez , an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian,, Eugenio M. Ramirez , Individually, Rosalba Luna , Individually v. Rashmi Ambewadikar D.D.S., Metropolitan Dental Associates, D.D.S. - 225 Broadway, P.C Tort document preview
  • Jordy F. Ramirez , an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian,, Eugenio M. Ramirez , Individually, Rosalba Luna , Individually v. Rashmi Ambewadikar D.D.S., Metropolitan Dental Associates, D.D.S. - 225 Broadway, P.C Tort document preview
  • Jordy F. Ramirez , an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian,, Eugenio M. Ramirez , Individually, Rosalba Luna , Individually v. Rashmi Ambewadikar D.D.S., Metropolitan Dental Associates, D.D.S. - 225 Broadway, P.C Tort document preview
  • Jordy F. Ramirez , an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian,, Eugenio M. Ramirez , Individually, Rosalba Luna , Individually v. Rashmi Ambewadikar D.D.S., Metropolitan Dental Associates, D.D.S. - 225 Broadway, P.C Tort document preview
  • Jordy F. Ramirez , an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian,, Eugenio M. Ramirez , Individually, Rosalba Luna , Individually v. Rashmi Ambewadikar D.D.S., Metropolitan Dental Associates, D.D.S. - 225 Broadway, P.C Tort document preview
						
                                

Preview

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/23/2022 08:56 AM INDEX NO. 152972/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 EXHIBIT “D” FILED: FILED : NEW NEW YORK YORK COUNTY COUNTY CLERK CLERK 11/23/2022 02/03/2015 08:56 04:07 AM INDEX INDEX NO. NO. 152972/2014 152972/2014 PM| NYSCEF NYSCEF DOC. DOC. NO. NO. 93 21 RECEIVED RECEIVED NYSCEF: NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 02/03/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK JORDY F. RAMIREZ, an infant under the age of 14 years, by his father and natural guardian, EUGENIO M. Index No.: 152972/14 RAM1REZ, Individually and ROSALBA LUNA, Individually ' VERIFIED ANSWER TO AMENDED VERIFIED Plaintiffs COMPLAINT -against- RASHMI AMBEWADIKAR, D.D.S., and METROPOLITAN DENTAL D.D.S. - 225 ASSOCIATES, BROADWAY, P.C., Defendants. Defendant, METROPOLITAN DENTAL ASSOCIATES, D.D.S., P.C., improperly named in the caption as METROPOLITAN DENTAL D.D.S. - 225 ASSOCIATES, BROADWAY, P.C., by and through its attomeys, GOLDBERG SEGALLA LLP, as and for its Answer to Plaintiff's Verified Complaint (hereinafter "the Complaint"), allege as follows: AS AND FOR THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 1. The Answering defendant denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraphs FIRST and FIFTH of the Complaint. 2. With respect to paragraph SECOND of the Complaint, deny in the form alleged, but admit METROPOLITAN DENTAL ASSOCIATES, D.D.S., P.C. is a domestic professional corporation organized pursuant to the laws of the State of New York, dental facility located at 225 Broadway, New York, New York. 1 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/23/2022 08:56 AM INDEX NO. 152972/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 3. Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs THIRD, FOURTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, and EIGHTH of the Complaint. AS AND FOR THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 4. With respect to paragraph NINTH of the Complaint, defendant repeats, reiterates and realleges paragraphs 1 through 3 of this Verified Answer with the same force and effect as if they were set forth fully and at length herein. 5. Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs TENTH and ELEVENTH of the Complaint. AS AND FOR THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 6. With respect to paragraph TWELFTH of the Complaint, defendant repeats, reiterates and realleges paragraphs 1 through 5 of this Verified Answer with the same force and effect as if they were set forth fully and at length herein. 7. The answering defendant denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraphs THIRTEENTH and FOURTEENTH of the Complaint. 8. Deny the allegations contained in paragraph FIFTEENTH of the Complaint. AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The answering Defendants assert the protections of § 15-108 of the General Obligations Law. AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE In the event that the Plaintiff recovers a verdict or judgment against the answering Defendant, then said verdict or judgment must be reduced pursuant to CPLR§ 4545 by those 2 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/23/2022 08:56 AM INDEX NO. 152972/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 amounts which have been or will with reasonable certainty replace or indemnify the Plaintiff in whole or in part for any past or future claimed medical expenses, or other such economic loss, as paid from any collateral source, such as, but not limited to, insurance, social security, worker's compensation or employee programs. AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE CPLR Article 16 applies to limit of the Defendant as to the non- any liability answering economic loss alleged by Plaintiff. AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Any award to Plaintiff for loss of earnings or impairment of earning ability should be reduced in accordance with CPLR §4546. AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The damages allegedly sustained by the Plaintiff were caused by the direct and proximate negligence or intentional conduct of other parties, their agents or employees, or by others unknown at this time over whom the answering Defendant had no control at any time relevant hereto, and in the event the answering Defendant is found liable to Plaintiff, which liability is expressly denied, Defendant will be entitled to indemnification, contribution or apportionment of liability pursuant to applicable law. AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The damage allegedly sustained by Plaintiff was not proximately caused by any negligence or culpable conduct on the part of the answering Defendant. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/23/2022 08:56 AM INDEX NO. 152972/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's alleged damages were caused and brought about by an intervening and superseding cause and was not caused by the answering Defendant or by a person or entity for whom the answering Defendant is responsible. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Upon information and belief, ifthe Plaintiff sustained any injuries or damages as alleged in the complaint, such injuries and damages were caused in whole or in part or were contributed to by Plaintiff's own culpable conduct, contributory negligence and want of care, without any culpable conduct, negligence or want of care on thepart of the answering Defendant, and the amount of damages recoverable by Plaintiff, if any, should be diminished in whole or in part in proportion to Plaintiff's culpable conduct. AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The answering Defendants intend to rely upon any statutory defenses available to said Defendant pursuant to the Public Health Law, Section 2805(d). AS AND FOR A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's verified complaint fails to state a viable cause of action. AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE All causes of action alleged by the plaintiff are barred due to the applicable statute of limitations. 4 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/23/2022 08:56 AM INDEX NO. 152972/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 WHEREFORE, Defendants demand judgment dismissing Plaintiff's Verified together with the costs, attorneys fees and disbursements of the within action, and for Complaint, such other, further or different relief which the Court may deem just and proper under the circumstances. Dated: White Plains, New York January 16, 2015 . RE I ÓILÚ S, ESQ. GOLD SE LA LLP Attor eys f D e idants M ET OPOLIT DENTAL ASSOCIATES, D.D.S., P.C. 11 Martine Avenue, Suite 750 White Plains,New York 10606 (914) 798-5400 File No.: 13501.0023 TO: STEPHEN S. LAROCCA, PLLC 11 Broadway, Suite 868 New York, New York 10004 (212) 785-8127 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/23/2022 08:56 AM INDEX NO. 152972/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 - VERIFICATION The undersigned, M. REGINA PHILLIPS, an attorney admitted to practice in the Courts of the State of New York, affirms: I am the attorney of record for the Defendant, METROPOLITAN DENTAL ASS OCIATES, D.D.S, P.C., in the within action; I have read the foregoing VERIFIED ANSWER and know the contents thereof; that the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. The grounds for my belief as to all matters not stated upon my knowledge are investigations which I have made or have caused to be made concerning the subject matter of this action, and statements of parties and/or witnesses made herein. This verification is made by affirmation because defendant resides in a jurisdiction outside the county where the affirmant maintains his office. The undersigned affirms that the foregoing statements are true under the penalties of perjury. Dated: White Plains, New York January 16, 2015 M. G P •IPS FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/23/2022 08:56 AM INDEX NO. 152972/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 CERTIFICATION M. REGINA PHILLIPS, an attorney admitted to practice law in the Courts of the State of New York, affirms under the penalties of perjury, that the foEowing statements are true: That I am the attorney for the Defendant METROPOLITAN DENTAL ASSOCIATES, DDS, PC in the above-captioned action. That I to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, formed after an certify reasonable under the circumstances, that presentation of Defendant's Answer and the inquiry contentions therein are not frivolous as defined in 22 NYCRR 130-1.1-a, et seg. Dated: White Plains, New York January 16, 2015 M. RE A HI S 7 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/23/2022 08:56 AM INDEX NO. 152972/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/23/2022 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE PATRICIA COCCIARDI, being duly sworn deposes and says that deponent is not a party to this action, is over 18 years of age and resides in Valley Cottage, New York. That on the 16th day of January, 2015, deponent served a true copy of the within VERIFIED ANSWER TO AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT, VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL, upon: TO: STEPHEN S. LAROCCA, PLLC 11 Broadway, Suite 868 New York, New York 10004 (212) 785-8127 PATRICI COCCIARDI Sworn to before me this 16th day of January, 2015 SHAUN J. PILCHER . Notary Public,State ofNew York Notary Pub No. 01P16285652 Qualified inRockland Cou 3335984v1 CommiSSIOn Expires 07/08/ 8