Preview
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
——————————————————————X
NICHOLAS GRANT,
RESPONSE TO
Plaintiff, DISCOVERY DEMANDS
-against-
Index No.: 510433/2019
147-02/12 LIBERTY AVE., LLC., JOUVAY NY, INC.
d/b/a JOUVAY NIGHT CLUB, ISAAC J. RIOS, and
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATE SECURITY
SERVICES, INC.,
Defendants.
——————————————————————X
C O U N S E L O R (S) :
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that pursuant to Article 31 of the CPLR, the Defendant
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATE SECURITY SERVICES, INC. (“PCSS”), by their attorneys
GOETZ SCHENKER BLEE & WIEDERHORN, as and for a response to plaintiff’s Discovery
Demands dated December 15, 2022:
Demand: “a) PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE, that the undersigned demands on
behalf of the plaintiff(s) in this action, that you provide me with copies of all records and reports
concerning contracts, employment records, weapons records, weapons licenses and certificates
regarding all security and security personal at the subject premises from 10/28/2013 to present.”
Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the
undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff.
Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or
necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or
relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an
1 of 6
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022
interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Plaintiff has already been
provided with contracts and employment records for defendant Isaac Rios.
Demand: “PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE, that the undersigned demands on behalf
of the plaintiff(s) in this action, that you provide me with copies of all policies and procedures in
effect on October 20, 2018 concerning:
i) Security and crowd control,
ii) Weapons,
iii) customer/patron injuries/complaints,
iv) when emergency medical assistance is to be requested,
v) Post-accident reporting procedures,
vi) Post-incident reporting procedures, and
vii) Post weapons discharge reporting procedures.”
Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the
undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff.
Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or
necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or
relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an
interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Without waiving any objections,
the undersigned defendant, upon information and belief, is not in possession of any documents
responsive to plaintiff’s demands.
Demand: “c) Please provide me with the name and contact information of the persons who
spoke with Plaintiff after the incident.”
2 of 6
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022
Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the
undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff.
Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or
necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or
relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an
interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Without waiving any objections,
the undersigned defendant, upon information and belief, has never been in possession of any
documents or information responsive to plaintiff’s demands.
Demand: “d) Please provide me with the names and contact information of ALL of the
supervisors, security guards and managers who were on site at the time of the subject incident.”
Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the
undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff.
Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or
necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or
relvant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an
interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Plaintiff’s supervisor was former
PCSS employee, Max Francois.
Demand: “e) Please provide me with the complete last known contact information of the
alleged former employees:
i) Max Francois;
ii) Terrance Roland;
iii) Joshua Davis;
iv) Kelvin Mills.”
3 of 6
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022
Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the
undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff.
Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or
necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or
relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an
interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Without waiving any objections,
the undersigned defendant provides as follows:
Max Francois
Objection. Witness, as a former employee, is to be produced for deposition on behalf of
the undersigned defendant.
Terrance Roland
redacted
Joshua Davis
redacted
Kelvin Mills
PCSS is not in possess of documents or information responsive to this demand.
Demand: “f) Please provide me with copies of all reports concerning any other personal
injury lawsuit for incidents that occurred in at the subject premises from October 20, 2013 to
present.”
Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the
undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff.
Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are patently irrelevant, overbroad, vague, burdensome and
without materiality or necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to
admissible evidence or relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s
4 of 6
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022
demands are in the form of an interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence.
Furthermore, plaintiff seeks documents and information available to the public.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, responding defendant hereby reserves the right to amend
and/or supplement these responses as discovery continues up to and at the time of trial pursuant to
the CPLR and Uniform Court Rules.
Dated: New York, New York
December 28, 2022
Yours, etc.
Matthew B. Stein
GOETZ SCHENKER BLEE & WIEDERHORN
By: Matthew B. Stein, Esq.
Attorneys for Defendant
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATE SECURITY
SERVICES, INC.
101 Greenwich Street, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10006
(212) 363-6900
Our File No.: 18233-NW
TO: Bryan Barenbaum, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF BRYAN BARENBAUM
Attorneys for Plaintiff
2060 Eastern Parkway
Brooklyn, NY 11207
(718) 421-1111
bryan@brooklynjustice.com
John W. Bieder, Esq.
BLACK MARJIEH & SANFORD, LLP
Attorneys for Defendant
147-02/12 LIBERTY AVE., LLC
100 Clearbrook Road
Elmsford, NY 10523
(914) 704-4400
jbieder@bmlslegal.com
Neil J. Palmieri, Esq.
BONGIORNO, MONTIGLIO, MITCHELL
5 of 6
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022
& PALMIERI, LLC
Attorneys for Defendant
JOUVAY NY INC. d/b/a JOUVAY NIGHT CLUB
200 Old Country Road – Suite 680
Mineola, NY 11501
(516) 620-4490
File No.: FRS 016421 NJP
neil.palmieri@bmmplaw.com
6 of 6
Preview
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS ——————————————————————X NICHOLAS GRANT, RESPONSE TO Plaintiff, DISCOVERY DEMANDS -against- Index No.: 510433/2019 147-02/12 LIBERTY AVE., LLC., JOUVAY NY, INC. d/b/a JOUVAY NIGHT CLUB, ISAAC J. RIOS, and PROFESSIONAL CORPORATE SECURITY SERVICES, INC., Defendants. ——————————————————————X C O U N S E L O R (S) : PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that pursuant to Article 31 of the CPLR, the Defendant PROFESSIONAL CORPORATE SECURITY SERVICES, INC. (“PCSS”), by their attorneys GOETZ SCHENKER BLEE & WIEDERHORN, as and for a response to plaintiff’s Discovery Demands dated December 15, 2022: Demand: “a) PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE, that the undersigned demands on behalf of the plaintiff(s) in this action, that you provide me with copies of all records and reports concerning contracts, employment records, weapons records, weapons licenses and certificates regarding all security and security personal at the subject premises from 10/28/2013 to present.” Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an 1 of 6 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022 interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Plaintiff has already been provided with contracts and employment records for defendant Isaac Rios. Demand: “PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE, that the undersigned demands on behalf of the plaintiff(s) in this action, that you provide me with copies of all policies and procedures in effect on October 20, 2018 concerning: i) Security and crowd control, ii) Weapons, iii) customer/patron injuries/complaints, iv) when emergency medical assistance is to be requested, v) Post-accident reporting procedures, vi) Post-incident reporting procedures, and vii) Post weapons discharge reporting procedures.” Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Without waiving any objections, the undersigned defendant, upon information and belief, is not in possession of any documents responsive to plaintiff’s demands. Demand: “c) Please provide me with the name and contact information of the persons who spoke with Plaintiff after the incident.” 2 of 6 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022 Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Without waiving any objections, the undersigned defendant, upon information and belief, has never been in possession of any documents or information responsive to plaintiff’s demands. Demand: “d) Please provide me with the names and contact information of ALL of the supervisors, security guards and managers who were on site at the time of the subject incident.” Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or relvant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Plaintiff’s supervisor was former PCSS employee, Max Francois. Demand: “e) Please provide me with the complete last known contact information of the alleged former employees: i) Max Francois; ii) Terrance Roland; iii) Joshua Davis; iv) Kelvin Mills.” 3 of 6 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022 Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are in the form of an interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Without waiving any objections, the undersigned defendant provides as follows: Max Francois Objection. Witness, as a former employee, is to be produced for deposition on behalf of the undersigned defendant. Terrance Roland redacted Joshua Davis redacted Kelvin Mills PCSS is not in possess of documents or information responsive to this demand. Demand: “f) Please provide me with copies of all reports concerning any other personal injury lawsuit for incidents that occurred in at the subject premises from October 20, 2013 to present.” Response: The plaintiff’s demand is duplicative of previous demands to which the undersigned defendant has already responded in full and without objection from the plaintiff. Furthermore, plaintiff’s demands are patently irrelevant, overbroad, vague, burdensome and without materiality or necessity. Plaintiff’s demands are not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence or relevant to a claim or defense of any party. Furthermore, plaintiff’s 4 of 6 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022 demands are in the form of an interrogatory. Plaintiff’s demands assume facts not in evidence. Furthermore, plaintiff seeks documents and information available to the public. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, responding defendant hereby reserves the right to amend and/or supplement these responses as discovery continues up to and at the time of trial pursuant to the CPLR and Uniform Court Rules. Dated: New York, New York December 28, 2022 Yours, etc. Matthew B. Stein GOETZ SCHENKER BLEE & WIEDERHORN By: Matthew B. Stein, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant PROFESSIONAL CORPORATE SECURITY SERVICES, INC. 101 Greenwich Street, 20th Floor New York, New York 10006 (212) 363-6900 Our File No.: 18233-NW TO: Bryan Barenbaum, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF BRYAN BARENBAUM Attorneys for Plaintiff 2060 Eastern Parkway Brooklyn, NY 11207 (718) 421-1111 bryan@brooklynjustice.com John W. Bieder, Esq. BLACK MARJIEH & SANFORD, LLP Attorneys for Defendant 147-02/12 LIBERTY AVE., LLC 100 Clearbrook Road Elmsford, NY 10523 (914) 704-4400 jbieder@bmlslegal.com Neil J. Palmieri, Esq. BONGIORNO, MONTIGLIO, MITCHELL 5 of 6 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2022 03:47 PM INDEX NO. 510433/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 68 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2022 & PALMIERI, LLC Attorneys for Defendant JOUVAY NY INC. d/b/a JOUVAY NIGHT CLUB 200 Old Country Road – Suite 680 Mineola, NY 11501 (516) 620-4490 File No.: FRS 016421 NJP neil.palmieri@bmmplaw.com 6 of 6