On January 10, 2017 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Robert Harris,
and
Abc Corps. 1 - 8,
Intimo, Inc.,
John Does 1 - 10,
Moris Zilkha,
Nathan Nathan,
Prestige Employee Administrators Ii, Inc. A K A Prestige Employee Administrators,
Prestige Employee Administrators, Inc. A K A Prestige Employee Administrators,
Tommy Nathan,
for Commercial - Contract
in the District Court of New York County.
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/23/2017 12:52 PM INDEX NO. 650175/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 19 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2017
MEYERS FRIED-GRODIN, LLP
Empire State Building
350 Fifth Avenue, 59th Floor
New York, NY 10118
Phone: (646) 596-1292
E-mail: JMeyers@MfgLegal.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Robert Harris
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------X
ROBERT HARRIS,
Plaintiff,
Index No. 650175/2017
vs.
NYSCEF Case
INTIMO, INC., NATHAN NATHAN AFFIRMATION OF
individually, TOMMY NATHAN, individually, JONATHAN MEYERS, ESQ.
MORIS ZILKHA, individually, and JOHN OPPOSING DEFENDANTS’
DOES 1-10, and ABC CORPS. 1-10, MOTION TO DISMISS
fictitious names for persons or entities whose PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
present roles and identities are unknown,
Defendants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------X
JONATHAN MEYERS, ESQ., an attorney admitted to practice law before the Courts of the
State of New York, affirms the following to be true under the penalties of perjury:
1. I am a partner with the law firm of Meyers Fried-Grodin, LLP, attorneys
for Plaintiff Robert Harris (“Plaintiff”) in this case. As such, I am fully familiar with the facts and
circumstances surrounding this matter.
-1-
1 of 3
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/23/2017 12:52 PM INDEX NO. 650175/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 19 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2017
2. I make this affirmation in opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s
Complaint.
3. With respect to Plaintiff’s age discrimination claim, in April 2016, he filed a
Charge of Discrimination with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(“EEOC”) dated April 25, 2016.
4. On September 21, 2016, the EEOC issued a Right to Sue Letter to Plaintiff.
Accordingly, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the United States District Court on September 30,
2016.
5. After Plaintiff filed his Complaint in federal court, Defendants produced evidence
showing that there was no basis for federal jurisdiction. More specifically, Defendants provided
documentation showing that the corporate defendant did not employ enough individuals to
trigger the application of the only federal claim in the case (an age discrimination claim under
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act).
6. Consequently, on January 10, 2017, the parties filed, with the federal court, a
Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice, with the aim of re-filing the case in State
Court (sans the federal ADEA claim).
7. Accordingly, on January 10, 2017, Plaintiff filed the Summons and Complaint
that initiated the instant lawsuit (which contains no federal claims). A copy of Plaintiff’s
Summons and Complaint in this case is attached, as Exhibit 1, to the moving affirmation of
Defendants’ counsel, filed in support of the instant motion that they filed with this Court on
February 10, 2017.
-2-
2 of 3
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/23/2017 12:52 PM INDEX NO. 650175/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 19 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2017
8. Plaintiff respectfully refers the Court to his Memorandum of Law Opposing
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (filed as part of these opposition papers) for
Plaintiff’s legal arguments opposing the instant motion.
Dated: New York, NY
March 23, 2017
______________________________
JONATHAN MEYERS
-3-
3 of 3
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/23/2017 12:52 PM INDEX NO. 650175/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 19 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2017 MEYERS FRIED-GRODIN, LLP Empire State Building 350 Fifth Avenue, 59th Floor New York, NY 10118 Phone: (646) 596-1292 E-mail: JMeyers@MfgLegal.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Robert Harris SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------------X ROBERT HARRIS, Plaintiff, Index No. 650175/2017 vs. NYSCEF Case INTIMO, INC., NATHAN NATHAN AFFIRMATION OF individually, TOMMY NATHAN, individually, JONATHAN MEYERS, ESQ. MORIS ZILKHA, individually, and JOHN OPPOSING DEFENDANTS’ DOES 1-10, and ABC CORPS. 1-10, MOTION TO DISMISS fictitious names for persons or entities whose PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT present roles and identities are unknown, Defendants. --------------------------------------------------------------------------X JONATHAN MEYERS, ESQ., an attorney admitted to practice law before the Courts of the State of New York, affirms the following to be true under the penalties of perjury: 1. I am a partner with the law firm of Meyers Fried-Grodin, LLP, attorneys for Plaintiff Robert Harris (“Plaintiff”) in this case. As such, I am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances surrounding this matter. -1- 1 of 3 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/23/2017 12:52 PM INDEX NO. 650175/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 19 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2017 2. I make this affirmation in opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. 3. With respect to Plaintiff’s age discrimination claim, in April 2016, he filed a Charge of Discrimination with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) dated April 25, 2016. 4. On September 21, 2016, the EEOC issued a Right to Sue Letter to Plaintiff. Accordingly, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the United States District Court on September 30, 2016. 5. After Plaintiff filed his Complaint in federal court, Defendants produced evidence showing that there was no basis for federal jurisdiction. More specifically, Defendants provided documentation showing that the corporate defendant did not employ enough individuals to trigger the application of the only federal claim in the case (an age discrimination claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act). 6. Consequently, on January 10, 2017, the parties filed, with the federal court, a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice, with the aim of re-filing the case in State Court (sans the federal ADEA claim). 7. Accordingly, on January 10, 2017, Plaintiff filed the Summons and Complaint that initiated the instant lawsuit (which contains no federal claims). A copy of Plaintiff’s Summons and Complaint in this case is attached, as Exhibit 1, to the moving affirmation of Defendants’ counsel, filed in support of the instant motion that they filed with this Court on February 10, 2017. -2- 2 of 3 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/23/2017 12:52 PM INDEX NO. 650175/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 19 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/24/2017 8. Plaintiff respectfully refers the Court to his Memorandum of Law Opposing Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (filed as part of these opposition papers) for Plaintiff’s legal arguments opposing the instant motion. Dated: New York, NY March 23, 2017 ______________________________ JONATHAN MEYERS -3- 3 of 3