Preview
Filing# 149124023 E-Filed 05/06/2022 02:56:21 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN
AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY,
FLORIDA
JOY FURER, CASE NO.: CACE-21-016578
Plaintiff,
VS.
GG RE HOLLYWOOD BEACH 613 LLC,
and RELAXPRO, LLC,
Defendants.
i
ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO
PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
The Defendant, RELAXPRO, LLC, by and throughundersigned counsel,files this Answer
and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint filed herein,and would state
as follows:
ALLEGATIONS AS TO ALL COUNTS
1. Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof.
2. Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof.
3 Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof.
4. Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof.
5. Denied as phrased.
6. Denied as phrased.
7. Denied as phrased.
8 Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof.
9- Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof.
*** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 05/06/2022 02:56:20 PM.****
10. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
COUNTI
NEGLIGENCE AGAINST GG RE HOLLYWOOD BEACH 613 LLC
11. Defendant re-alleges
its responses to paragraphs 1 through 10, as if fullyset forth
herein.
12. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
13. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
14. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
15. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
16. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
17. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
a. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
b. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
c. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
2
d. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
e. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
f. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
g. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
h. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
i. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
j. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
k. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
1. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
m. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
n. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
o. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
3
thereof.
p. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
q. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
r. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
s. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
t. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
u. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
v. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
18. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
19. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
20. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
21. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
a. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
b. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
4
c. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
d. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded
thereof.
22. Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof.
COUNT II
NEGLIGENCE AGAINST RELAXPRO LLC
23. Defendant re-alleges
its responses to paragraphs 1 through 10, as if fullyset forth
herein.
24. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
25. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
26. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
27. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
28. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
29. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
a. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
b. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
c. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
d. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
e. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
f. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
g. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
h. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
5
i. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
j. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
k. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
1. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
m. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
n. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
o. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
p. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
q. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
r. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
s. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
t. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
u. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
30. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
31. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
32. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
33. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
a. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
b. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
c. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
d. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
34. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof.
6
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
By way of separate affirmative defenses to the entire Complaint, this Defendant states:
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That it is not guiltyof any negligencewhatsoever.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Any purported injuriesor damages whatsoever allegedlysuffered by the Plaintiff were
breach of duty,action,or omission on the
not the proximate or actual result of any negligence,
part of this Defendant.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That at the was
time and place in questionand immediately priorthereto,the Plaintiff,
guiltyof negligence,which negligence was the sole proximate cause of the incident in question,
contributed proximately to causing the incident in question,thereby
or which, in the alternative,
barringthis claim or reducing it by the proportionthat the negligenceaforesaid contributed to the
total negligence which caused the accident.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
This Defendant says that the Plaintiff was negligentin failing
to keep a sufficient lookout
to take sufficient caution for her
or in failing own safetyafter she knew, or could have known, of
the condition complained of. Her damages, if any, are reduced in proportionto her negligence.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
For further affirmative defense, this Defendant would show that it was not the sole legal
and this Defendant is therebyresponsible
cause ofthe accident in question, only for that percentage
o f negligence attributable to them which was the legalcause o f the accident in question.
7
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That the injuriesallegedly suffered by the Plaintiff,JOY FURER, were due to
circumstances, conditions, or events beyond the control of this Defendant and not reasonably
foreseeable by a prudent person.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
This claim is barred due to the lack of sufficient notice to the Defendant of the alleged
defective condition.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
This Defendant is entitled to a set-offofall payments made by any and all collateral sources
or other
for expenses, bills, incurred
obligations as a result ofthe subjectaccident.
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That the damages complained of were as a result of the negligence of a third person or
persons whose conduct was beyond the knowledge or control of this Defendant and for whose
negligence this Defendant is not responsible.Pursuant to Florida Statute §768.81(3), this
Defendant will request that such third persons appear on the verdict form and ask the Court to
among any and
allow the jury to apportion fault or liability all to the accident or
participants
incident which allegedlycaused Plaintiffs damages. This Defendant reserves the rightto amend
its Answer name additional responsiblepartiespursuant
and Affirmative Defenses to specifically
to Nash v. Wells Fargo Guard Services, Inc.,678 So.2d 1262 (Fla.1996).
TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff's injuriesand/or damages were not caused by the incident that is allegedas the
subjectof Plaintiff's complaint, but rather by pre-existing,
subsequent, or unrelated conditions,
or incidents,for which
injuries, this Defendant would not be liable.
8
ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The facts having not been fullydeveloped,this Defendant states that Plaintiff's claims are
barred by the doctrines of Waiver and Estoppel.
TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff failed to mitigate,minimize, or avoid any damages allegedlysustained. As such,
any damages sustained by the Plaintiff should be reduced proportionallyfor the failure to mitigate,
minimize, or avoid such losses.
THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That at all complained of in the Complain, the Plaintiff
times relevant to the allegations
was beyond any reasonable zone of duty allegedlyowed by this Defendant and at no time did any
action or inaction on the part of this Defendant extend or expand the zone of duty allegedlyowed
by this Defendant.
FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff's damages, if any, were the result o f the intentional criminal action o f persons
who were not under this Defendant's dominion or control,and such criminal action was the
efficient cause of this incident.
independent,intervening,
RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO SUPPLEMENT DEFENSES
The facts having not been fullydeveloped,this Defendant reserves the rightto supplement
this Answer with additional Affirmative Defenses with proper notice to all parties.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff is not entitled to any relief whatsoever. This Honorable Court is
requestedto assess the costs of this proceedingherein againstthe Plaintiff and to grant such other
relief as it deems rightand proper. The Defendant hereby demands trial by jury of all issues so
triable as a matter of right.
9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoingwas furnished by email on May 6,
2022 to: Zachary Bodenheimer, Esq. ZDB@florida-justice.corn;mtfassistant@florida-
justice.com,Flanagan & Bodenheimer Injuryand Wrongful Death Law Firm, 2525 Ponce de Leon
Blvd., Suite 650, Coral Gables, FL 33145, John J. Glenn, Esq., (GG RE) jglenn@asglaw.com,
AndersonGlenn LLP, 2650 N. MilitaryTrail, Suite 430, Boca Raton, FL 33431 and Filzah
Pavalon, Esq., (GG RE) filzahiqbal@gmail.com, AndersonGlenn LLP, 10751 Deerwood Park
Blvd., Suite 105, Jacksonville,FL 32256.
Respectfullysubmitted,
MITRANI, RYNOR, ADAMSKY &
TOLAND, P.A.
1200 Weston Road
Penthouse
Weston, Florida 33326
(954) 335-1010 Telephone
(954) 335-1017 Facsimile
BY: /s/Alicia M. Corbo
ERIC C. SAGE
Florida Bar Number: 928577
esage@mitrani.com
ALICIA M. CORBO
Florida Bar Number: 1025354
acorbo@mitrani.com
AttorneysforDefendant,Relaxpro,
LLC
service@mitrani.com
10
Preview
Filing# 149124023 E-Filed 05/06/2022 02:56:21 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA JOY FURER, CASE NO.: CACE-21-016578 Plaintiff, VS. GG RE HOLLYWOOD BEACH 613 LLC, and RELAXPRO, LLC, Defendants. i ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT The Defendant, RELAXPRO, LLC, by and throughundersigned counsel,files this Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint filed herein,and would state as follows: ALLEGATIONS AS TO ALL COUNTS 1. Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof. 2. Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof. 3 Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof. 4. Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof. 5. Denied as phrased. 6. Denied as phrased. 7. Denied as phrased. 8 Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof. 9- Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof. *** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 05/06/2022 02:56:20 PM.**** 10. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. COUNTI NEGLIGENCE AGAINST GG RE HOLLYWOOD BEACH 613 LLC 11. Defendant re-alleges its responses to paragraphs 1 through 10, as if fullyset forth herein. 12. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 13. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 14. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 15. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 16. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 17. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. a. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. b. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. c. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 2 d. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. e. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. f. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. g. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. h. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. i. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. j. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. k. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 1. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. m. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. n. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. o. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded 3 thereof. p. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. q. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. r. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. s. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. t. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. u. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. v. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 18. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 19. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 20. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 21. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. a. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. b. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 4 c. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. d. Does not apply to this Defendant and as such, denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 22. Without knowledge. Therefore, denied and strict proof demanded thereof. COUNT II NEGLIGENCE AGAINST RELAXPRO LLC 23. Defendant re-alleges its responses to paragraphs 1 through 10, as if fullyset forth herein. 24. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 25. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 26. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 27. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 28. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 29. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. a. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. b. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. c. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. d. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. e. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. f. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. g. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. h. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 5 i. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. j. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. k. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 1. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. m. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. n. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. o. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. p. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. q. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. r. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. s. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. t. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. u. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 30. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 31. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 32. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 33. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. a. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. b. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. c. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. d. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 34. Denied. Strict proof demanded thereof. 6 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES By way of separate affirmative defenses to the entire Complaint, this Defendant states: FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That it is not guiltyof any negligencewhatsoever. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Any purported injuriesor damages whatsoever allegedlysuffered by the Plaintiff were breach of duty,action,or omission on the not the proximate or actual result of any negligence, part of this Defendant. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That at the was time and place in questionand immediately priorthereto,the Plaintiff, guiltyof negligence,which negligence was the sole proximate cause of the incident in question, contributed proximately to causing the incident in question,thereby or which, in the alternative, barringthis claim or reducing it by the proportionthat the negligenceaforesaid contributed to the total negligence which caused the accident. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE This Defendant says that the Plaintiff was negligentin failing to keep a sufficient lookout to take sufficient caution for her or in failing own safetyafter she knew, or could have known, of the condition complained of. Her damages, if any, are reduced in proportionto her negligence. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE For further affirmative defense, this Defendant would show that it was not the sole legal and this Defendant is therebyresponsible cause ofthe accident in question, only for that percentage o f negligence attributable to them which was the legalcause o f the accident in question. 7 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That the injuriesallegedly suffered by the Plaintiff,JOY FURER, were due to circumstances, conditions, or events beyond the control of this Defendant and not reasonably foreseeable by a prudent person. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE This claim is barred due to the lack of sufficient notice to the Defendant of the alleged defective condition. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE This Defendant is entitled to a set-offofall payments made by any and all collateral sources or other for expenses, bills, incurred obligations as a result ofthe subjectaccident. NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That the damages complained of were as a result of the negligence of a third person or persons whose conduct was beyond the knowledge or control of this Defendant and for whose negligence this Defendant is not responsible.Pursuant to Florida Statute §768.81(3), this Defendant will request that such third persons appear on the verdict form and ask the Court to among any and allow the jury to apportion fault or liability all to the accident or participants incident which allegedlycaused Plaintiffs damages. This Defendant reserves the rightto amend its Answer name additional responsiblepartiespursuant and Affirmative Defenses to specifically to Nash v. Wells Fargo Guard Services, Inc.,678 So.2d 1262 (Fla.1996). TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's injuriesand/or damages were not caused by the incident that is allegedas the subjectof Plaintiff's complaint, but rather by pre-existing, subsequent, or unrelated conditions, or incidents,for which injuries, this Defendant would not be liable. 8 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The facts having not been fullydeveloped,this Defendant states that Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrines of Waiver and Estoppel. TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff failed to mitigate,minimize, or avoid any damages allegedlysustained. As such, any damages sustained by the Plaintiff should be reduced proportionallyfor the failure to mitigate, minimize, or avoid such losses. THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That at all complained of in the Complain, the Plaintiff times relevant to the allegations was beyond any reasonable zone of duty allegedlyowed by this Defendant and at no time did any action or inaction on the part of this Defendant extend or expand the zone of duty allegedlyowed by this Defendant. FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's damages, if any, were the result o f the intentional criminal action o f persons who were not under this Defendant's dominion or control,and such criminal action was the efficient cause of this incident. independent,intervening, RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO SUPPLEMENT DEFENSES The facts having not been fullydeveloped,this Defendant reserves the rightto supplement this Answer with additional Affirmative Defenses with proper notice to all parties. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff is not entitled to any relief whatsoever. This Honorable Court is requestedto assess the costs of this proceedingherein againstthe Plaintiff and to grant such other relief as it deems rightand proper. The Defendant hereby demands trial by jury of all issues so triable as a matter of right. 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoingwas furnished by email on May 6, 2022 to: Zachary Bodenheimer, Esq. ZDB@florida-justice.corn;mtfassistant@florida- justice.com,Flanagan & Bodenheimer Injuryand Wrongful Death Law Firm, 2525 Ponce de Leon Blvd., Suite 650, Coral Gables, FL 33145, John J. Glenn, Esq., (GG RE) jglenn@asglaw.com, AndersonGlenn LLP, 2650 N. MilitaryTrail, Suite 430, Boca Raton, FL 33431 and Filzah Pavalon, Esq., (GG RE) filzahiqbal@gmail.com, AndersonGlenn LLP, 10751 Deerwood Park Blvd., Suite 105, Jacksonville,FL 32256. Respectfullysubmitted, MITRANI, RYNOR, ADAMSKY & TOLAND, P.A. 1200 Weston Road Penthouse Weston, Florida 33326 (954) 335-1010 Telephone (954) 335-1017 Facsimile BY: /s/Alicia M. Corbo ERIC C. SAGE Florida Bar Number: 928577 esage@mitrani.com ALICIA M. CORBO Florida Bar Number: 1025354 acorbo@mitrani.com AttorneysforDefendant,Relaxpro, LLC service@mitrani.com 10