Preview
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 1 of 3 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
Jennine DiSomma (Attorney ID: 028851984)
Jakob B. Halpern (Attorney ID: 002582004)
SAIBER LLC
18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200
Florham Park, New Jersey 07932-2266
T: (973) 622-3333
F: (973) 622-3349
Attorneys for Defendant
Rite Aid Corporation
MAZOUZ SHANA, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION: ESSEX COUNTY
Plaintiff, DOCKET NO.: ESX-L-6979-14
v. Civil Action
RITE AID CORPORATION; NICOLE DEFENDANT RITE AID
SCHRUBY; MICHELLE ALMONTE; CORPORATION’S
HAEWON PARK; JOHN DOE #I-V AND NOTICE OF MOTION FOR
JANE DOE #I-V, INDEMNIFICATION OF
ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS
Defendants.
TO: Mazouz Shana
1317 Roger Avenue
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807
md000@msn.com
Plaintiff (pro se)
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on Friday, August 2, 2019 at 9:00 A.M., or as soon
thereafter as counsel may be heard, the undersigned attorneys for defendant Rite Aid Corporation
(“Rite Aid”), shall move before the Honorable Bridget A. Stecher, J.S.C., Superior Court of New
Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, Newark, New Jersey 07102, for an Order indemnifying
Rite Aid for its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs under the parties’ settlement agreement.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that in support of its motion, Rite Aid shall rely
upon its Brief, the Certification of Jakob B. Halpern, Esq. (with exhibits), Reply papers
submitted, and oral argument, if any.
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 2 of 3 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that a proposed form of Order is included
herewith.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Rite Aid requests oral argument only if the
motion is opposed.
SAIBER LLC
Attorneys for Defendant
Rite Aid Corporation
/s Jakob B. Halpern
JAKOB B. HALPERN
Dated: July 17, 2019
2
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 3 of 3 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that, on this date, I caused a copy of Rite Aid’s Notice of Motion for
Indemnification of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, its Brief, the Certification of Jakob B. Halpern,
Esq. (with exhibits), and a proposed form of Order to be sent by Email and Federal Express
delivery to:
Mazouz Shana
1317 Roger Avenue
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807
md000@msn.com
Plaintiff (pro se)
s/ Jakob B. Halpern
JAKOB B. HALPERN
Dated: July 17, 2019
3
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 1 of 2 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
MAZOUZ SHANA, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION: ESSEX COUNTY
Plaintiff, DOCKET NO.: ESX-L-6979-14
v. Civil Action
RITE AID CORPORATION; NICOLE
SCHRUBY; MICHELLE ALMONTE; ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT RITE
HAEWON PARK; JOHN DOE #I-V AND AID CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR
JANE DOE #1-V, INDEMNIFICATION OF ATTORNEYS’
FEES AND COSTS
Defendants.
THIS MATTER having been opened to the Court by Saiber LLC, attorneys for
defendant Rite Aid Corporation (“Rite Aid”), on notice to all parties having appeared, for the
entry of an Order granting its Motion for Indemnification of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs; and the
Court having considered all papers submitted in support of the motion and all opposition thereto,
if any; and the Court having heard oral argument, if any; and for good cause having been shown,
IT IS on this _________ day of ______________, 2019;
ORDERED that Rite Aid’s Motion for Indemnification of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs be
and is hereby GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that, pursuant to the indemnification provision in the parties’ settlement
agreement, Plaintiff shall indemnify Rite Aid for its reasonable fees and costs incurred in defense
of the litigation captioned Shana v. Saiber LLC and Rite Aid Corporation, Docket No. SOM-L-
312-19, in the amount of $16,909.00 within fourteen (14) days of entry of this Order; and it is
further
ORDERED that, pursuant to the indemnification provision in the parties’ settlement
agreement, Plaintiff shall indemnify Rite Aid for its reasonable fees and costs incurred in
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 2 of 2 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
connection with this Motion for Indemnification within fourteen (14) days of entry of this Order;
and it is further
ORDERED that Rite Aid shall file and serve a certification setting forth the full amount
of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in connection with this Motion for
Indemnification within seven (7) days of the entry of this Order; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff shall remit a check or money order payable to Rite Aid
Corporation for $16,909.00 plus the amount set forth in the certification required by the
preceding paragraph within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this Order by service to Rite Aid’s
outside counsel, Saiber LLC, 18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200, Florham Park, NJ 07932, Attn:
Jakob B. Halpern, Esq.; and it is further
ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be served upon all parties within ____ days of
the date on which it is received by counsel for Rite Aid.
__________________________________________
HONORABLE BRIDGET A. STECHER, J.S.C.
_____ Opposed
_____ Unopposed
2
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 1 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
Jennine DiSomma (Attorney ID: 028851984)
Jakob B. Halpern (Attorney ID: 002582004)
SAIBER LLC
18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200
Florham Park, New Jersey 07932-2266
T: (973) 622-3333
F: (973) 622-3349
Attorneys for Defendant
Rite Aid Corporation
MAZOUZ SHANA, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION: ESSEX COUNTY
Plaintiff, DOCKET NO.: ESX-L-6979-14
v. Civil Action
RITE AID CORPORATION; NICOLE CERTIFICATION OF JAKOB B.
SCHRUBY; MICHELLE ALMONTE; HALPERN, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF
HAEWON PARK; JOHN DOE #I-V AND DEFENDANT RITE AID
JANE DOE #I-V, CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR
INDEMNIFICATION OF ATTORNEYS’
Defendants. FEES AND COSTS
JAKOB B. HALPERN, of full age, hereby certifies as follows:
1. I am an attorney-at-law of the State of New Jersey and Member of the firm Saiber
LLC, attorneys for defendant Rite Aid Corporation (“Rite Aid”) in this matter.
2. I am fully familiar with the matters set forth herein and submit this Certification
in support of Rite Aid’s Motion for Indemnification of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs.
A. Factual Background
3. In 2014, Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against Rite Aid (“Shana I”) in this
Court.
4. On September 26, 2018, the parties appeared at a noticed pretrial conference
before the Honorable Bridget Stecher, J.S.C. At the conclusion of the pretrial conference, Judge
Stecher presided over a settlement conference, which was held off the record but in the
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 2 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
courtroom. At the conclusion of this process, the parties agreed to a settlement. Plaintiff
indicated his acceptance of the settlement was contingent upon being satisfied with the tax
treatment of the settlement, and on October 4, 2018, he indicated both the Court (by telephone)
and to Rite Aid (by email to me) that he was indeed satisfied with such tax treatment and thus
had accepted the settlement.
5. On October 5, 2018, I emailed Plaintiff on behalf Rite Aid stating:
In order for us to evaluate your email, please confirm by return email that it is
your intent to settle this matter on the terms discussed before Judge Stecher on
Wednesday, which include the following material provisions that were listed
for the Court:
The material terms listed in the email included (but were not limited to):
You [Plaintiff] will provide a full general release of all claims you made and
which you could have made against Rite Aid and its affiliated entities and
individuals
Covenant not to sue
Indemnification provisions for violation of the above
A true and correct copy of my October 5, 2018 email setting forth these material terms is
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
6. On the same day, October 5, 2018, Plaintiff responded by email, stating:
Yes, it is my intent to settle this action pursuant to the terms discussed before judge
Stecher on September 26, 2018 as indicated below.
(Emphasis added.) The terms “indicated below” are those found in my October 5, 2018 email
(attached as Exhibit A), the material text of which is set forth in the preceding paragraph. A true
and correct copy of Plaintiff’s October 5, 2018 email is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
7. Upon receipt of Plaintiff’s October 5, 2018 email, our firm sent a letter to Judge
Stecher informing Her Honor that the matter had settled and that the settlement:
2
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 3 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
include[d] all of the material provisions that were listed for the Court during our
September 26, 2018 conference before Your Honor.
(Emphasis added). A true and correct copy of Rite Aid’s October 5, 2018 letter to the Court is
attached hereto as Exhibit C.
8. When he received the service copy of the letter found at Exhibit C, Plaintiff
responded to me by email a short time later on October 5, 2018, stating:
I am okay with the attached submission to the court.
(Emphasis added). A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s October 5, 2018 email is attached
hereto as Exhibit D.
9. Notwithstanding the settlement discussed above, on March 8, 2019, Plaintiff filed
a Complaint against Rite Aid and Saiber, Rite Aid’s attorneys in Shana I, in the Superior Court
of New Jersey, Somerset County, bearing docket number SOM-L-312-19 (“Shana II”). A true
and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Complaint in Shana II is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
10. Rite Aid learned of the Shana II lawsuit shortly after Saiber was served with the
Complaint on March 21, 2019.
11. Upon learning of the lawsuit, Rite Aid retained Saiber for its defense, and
commenced a vigorous defense against Plaintiff’s claims, which it believed were not only barred
by the settlement agreement but independently lacking in any merit whatsoever. Indeed, given
that Rule 4:6-1(a) required the filing of a pleading or motion responsive to the Complaint within
35 days after its service, work on the defense in Shana II commenced immediately.
12. In connection with the defense of Shana II, Saiber analyzed Plaintiff’s pleadings,
developed legal strategy, conducted legal research into Plaintiff’s claims, prepared a Rule 1:4-8
frivolous litigation letter, drafted a motion to dismiss, and performed other related and necessary
tasks with respect to preparing a thorough defense in that matter.
3
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 4 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
13. A true and correct copy of the April 1, 2019 Rule 1:4-8 letter, that was served on
Plaintiff in Shana II, is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
14. On April 10, 2019, Rite Aid filed its motion before this Court seeking an Order
enforcing the settlement agreement. A true and correct copy of Rite Aid’s Notice of Motion is
attached hereto as Exhibit G.
15. On April 12, 2019, before the responsive pleading deadline in Shana II, Plaintiff
filed an Amended Complaint adding a new claim. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s
Amended Complaint in Shana II is attached hereto as Exhibit H.
16. Rite Aid was served with Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint in Shana II on May 1,
2019.
17. The new claim that had been added to the Amended Complaint required
additional legal research and added to the arguments requiring dismissal in Rite Aid’s draft
Motion to Dismiss.
18. On May 10, 2019, the parties appeared before Judge Stecher to argue Rite Aid’s
Motion to Enforce Settlement. During oral argument, Judge Stecher stated, “I’m ruling that [the
Shana II lawsuit is] in violation of the agreement.” Judge Stecher emphasized that Her Honor
had found Plaintiff’s conduct in taking “four months to decide that you were going to [attempt
to] disavow a settlement [to be] completely disturbing to the Court.” Finally, Her Honor invited
Rite Aid to separately file the within motion for indemnification of its attorneys’ fees and costs
pursuant to the settlement agreement’s indemnification provision. During the hearing, Plaintiff
indicated that he intended to appeal the Court’s order on the motion to enforce settlement. A true
and correct copy of relevant excerpts of the transcript of the May 10, 2019 hearing before Judge
Stecher is attached hereto as Exhibit I.
4
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 5 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
19. Thereafter, also on May 10, 2019, the Court issued an Order granting Rite Aid’s
motion to enforce the settlement agreement (which incorporated a signed version of Rite Aid’s
confirmatory email also found at Exhibit A). Among other things, that Order stated:
Rite Aid and plaintiff Mazouz Shana are bound by a valid and enforceable
settlement agreement containing the following material terms: . . .
[1] Plaintiff will provide a full general release of all claims he made and
which he could have made against Rite Aid and its affiliated entities and
individuals; . . .
[2] A covenant not to sue; and
[3] Indemnification provision for violation of any of the above.
In addition, Order expressly stated that Shana II:
hereby violates the terms of the parties’ valid and enforceable settlement
agreement, including the general release and covenant not to sue.
Finally, the Court ordered that:
by motion for fees with notice to Shana, counsel for Rite Aid shall provide Shana
with a certification or certifications indicating the amount of reasonable attorneys’
fees and costs incurred in defense of Shana II following the completion of Shana
II, and the Court will thereafter rule as to same.
A true and correct copy of the Court’s May 10, 2019 Order is attached hereto as Exhibit J.
20. Because Plaintiff had indicated that he intended to appeal the Court’s May 10,
2019 Order, on May 12, 2019, the parties signed a stipulation to extend the time for Rite Aid and
Saiber to respond to the Amended Complaint in Shana II for an additional 60 days to avoid
incurring additional attorneys’ fees and costs in connection with that lawsuit while Plaintiff’s
appeal was pending.
21. Rite Aid’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint was nearly
complete by this time.
5
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 6 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
22. After that stipulation was signed, Rite Aid’s counsel ceased performing any
additional work – and thus incurring any fees – in preparation of its defense in Shana II.
23. Ultimately, Plaintiff never filed a Notice of Appeal, and his time to do so has
since expired.
24. Instead, on June 28, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of
Shana II. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal is attached hereto
as Exhibit K.
25. After receipt of Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, Rite Aid promptly
prepared and filed the within motion, consistent with Judge Stecher’s previous instructions.
B. Reasonable Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Incurred in Defense of Shana II
26. The following attorneys and paralegal rendered billed services in connection with
the defense of Shana II:
a. Arnold B. Calmann, who is a Member of Saiber. He graduated from Syracuse
University College of Law in 1972 and has over 45 years of legal experience. Mr.
Calmann exercised ultimate supervision over the matter given his relationship
with Rite Aid.
b. Jennine DiSomma, who is a Member of Saiber. She graduated from Seton Hall
University School of Law in 1984 and has over 30 years of legal experience. Ms.
DiSomma was the senior partner responsible for defense of the matter.
c. Jakob B. Halpern, who is a Member of Saiber. He graduated, magna cum laude,
from Georgetown University Law Center in 2004 and has 15 years of legal
experience. Mr. Halpern was the junior partner responsible for defense of the
matter.
6
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 7 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
d. Vincent C. Cirilli, who is an Associate at Saiber. He graduated, with honors,
from The George Washington University Law School in 2014 and has 5 years of
legal experience.
e. Rebecca Williams, who is a Paralegal at Saiber. She graduated from an ABA
approved paralegal program at Bergen Community College in 2006 and has 13
years of paralegal experience.
27. Mr. Calmann’s standard hourly rate is $625, which was the rate charged in
connection with the defense of Shana II.
28. Ms. DiSomma’s standard hourly rate is $435, which was the rate charged in
connection with the defense of Shana II.
29. Mr. Halpern’s standard hourly rate is $360, which was the rate charged in
connection with the defense of Shana II.
30. Mr. Cirilli’s standard hourly rate is $235, which was the rate charged in
connection with the defense of Shana II.
31. Ms. Williams’ standard hourly rate is $160, which was the rate charged in
connection with the defense of Shana II.
32. The foregoing hourly rates, which have been charged in this case, are entirely
reasonable. During my 15 years of practice – 13 of which have been at Saiber in New Jersey – I
have served as lead counsel, cocounsel and local counsel in all types of matters litigated in both
New Jersey state courts and the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey,
including commercial disputes and more particularly employment disputes. I have also worked
with and continue to work closely with or adversely to other commercial and employment
7
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 8 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
litigation attorneys who practice in New Jersey. In that capacity, I have become extremely
familiar with the hourly billing rates charged by those attorneys for comparable cases.
33. Based upon my knowledge and experience, the hourly rates charged by Saiber are
comparable to the prevailing rates generally charged by other attorneys and law firms with whom
I have worked close or adversely to, taking into account the skills of the Saiber attorneys and the
level of experience of those attorneys. Indeed, many of the employment litigation attorneys who
I have worked with or against, whose skills and experience are comparable to those of the Saiber
attorneys, had rates that were substantially similar to or higher than those of the Saiber attorneys.
34. Similarly, the tasks undertaken by the Saiber attorneys, as well as the time to
complete such tasks, in defense of Shana II were both reasonable and necessary given Plaintiff’s
lawsuit and to defend against his barred and unmeritorious claims.
35. The total fees billed in Shana II though dismissal – with those fees incurred in the
tasks discussed in Paragraphs 11-18, supra – were $16,909.00.
36. In light of Plaintiff’s conduct and his violation of the express terms of the
settlement agreement, Rite Aid was also compelled to prepare and file the present motion. The
same attorneys listed above participated in the preparation of this motion, and their time was
billed at the same reasonable rates previously discussed. Again, this was reasonable and
necessary given Plaintiff’s conduct and responsibility for Rite Aid’s unnecessary incursion of
additional attorney’s fees.
37. The total fees (both that have been and/or will be billed to Rite Aid) in connection
with the present motion through yesterday are $5,283.00. In addition to this amount, Rite Aid
also requests that it be indemnified for any additional fees it incurs in connection with the
briefing and argument of this motion, and any future appeal by Plaintiff.
8
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 9 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
38. None of the fees and costs that Rite Aid requests be indemnified for include any
actions that were undertaken in connection with Rite Aid’s motion to enforce settlement in Shana
I.
C. Unpublished Authority
39. A true and correct copy of the Court’s decision in Kitchen King, Inc. v. Scisco,
2013 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2556 (App. Div. Oct. 23, 2013), is attached hereto as Exhibit L.
40. A true and correct copy of the Court’s decision in In re Estate of Vnencak, 2008
N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1114 (App. Div. Feb. 29, 2008), is attached hereto as Exhibit M.
41. A true and correct copy of the Court’s decision in Jobar Realty, Inc. v. Ryan,
2007 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 826 (App. Div. Dec. 21, 2007), is attached hereto as Exhibit N.
42. A true and correct copy of the Court’s decision in Pedraza v. Alameda Unified
Sch. Dist., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41096 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2012), is attached hereto as
Exhibit O.
I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the
foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
/s Jakob B. Halpern
JAKOB B. HALPERN
Dated: July 17, 2019
9
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 10 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
EXHIBIT A
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 11 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
Vincent C. Cirilli
From: Jakob B. Halpern
Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 9:58 AM
To: 'Mark Shana'
Cc: Jennine DiSomma
Subject: RE: Shana v. Rite Aid
Mr. Shana,
In order for us to evaluate your email, please confirm by return email that it is your intent to settle this matter on
the terms discussed before Judge Stecher on Wednesday, which include the following material provisions that
were listed for the Court:
Rite Aid will resolve the matter for $ to be paid to you
Rite Aid to issue you a 1099-MISC for that amount
Rite Aid and its attorneys are providing no advice as to the taxation of that payment and will comply
with all legal, procedural and ethical obligations in connection with same
You will provide a full general release of all claims you made and which you could have made against
Rite Aid and its affiliated entities and individuals
An acceptable confidentiality provision
Rite Aid will respond to employment verification requests only to confirm your employment and
provide dates of employment, final position held and final salary
A non-disparagement clause
Your representation that Plaintiff has filed no other lawsuits, administrative claims, complaints of Board
of Pharmacy violations, etc.
Covenant not to sue
Indemnification provisions for violation of the above
Thank you,
Jake Halpern
From: Mark Shana [mailto:md000@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 2:38 PM
To: Jakob B. Halpern
Subject: Shana v. Rite Aid
Mr. Halpern,
I write to advise that the Plaintiff has decided to accept the settlement that was reached before judge Stecher
on September 26, 2018. I telephoned judge Stecher's Chambers a short while ago this afternoon and informed
the court of plaintiff's decision. I also advised the court that I will be sending this email to counsel
and proposing that the parties request a brief conference with the court to formalize final resolution of this
matter.
1
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 12 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
Sincerely,
Mark Shana
2
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 13 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
EXHIBIT B
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 14 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
Vincent C. Cirilli
From: Mark Shana
Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 12:03 PM
To: Jakob B. Halpern
Subject: Re: Shana v. Rite Aid
Mr. Halpern,
Yes, it is my intent to settle this action pursuant to the terms discussed before judge Stecher on September 26,
2018 as indicated below.
Sincerely,
Mark Shana
From: Jakob B. Halpern
Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 9:58 AM
To: 'Mark Shana'
Cc: Jennine DiSomma
Subject: RE: Shana v. Rite Aid
Mr. Shana,
In order for us to evaluate your email, please confirm by return email that it is your intent to settle this matter
on the terms discussed before Judge Stecher on Wednesday, which include the following material provisions
that were listed for the Court:
Rite Aid will resolve the matter for $ to be paid to you
Rite Aid to issue you a 1099-MISC for that amount
Rite Aid and its attorneys are providing no advice as to the taxation of that payment and will comply with all
legal, procedural and ethical obligations in connection with same
You will provide a full general release of all claims you made and which you could have made against Rite Aid
and its affiliated entities and individuals
An acceptable confidentiality provision
Rite Aid will respond to employment verification requests only to confirm your employment and provide dates
of employment, final position held and final salary
A non-disparagement clause
Your representation that Plaintiff has filed no other lawsuits, administrative claims, complaints of Board of
Pharmacy violations, etc.
Covenant not to sue
Indemnification provisions for violation of the above
Thank you,
1
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 15 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
Jake Halpern
From: Mark Shana [mailto:md000@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 2:38 PM
To: Jakob B. Halpern
Subject: Shana v. Rite Aid
Mr. Halpern,
I write to advise that the Plaintiff has decided to accept the settlement that was reached before judge Stecher
on September 26, 2018. I telephoned judge Stecher's Chambers a short while ago this afternoon and informed
the court of plaintiff's decision. I also advised the court that I will be sending this email to counsel
and proposing that the parties request a brief conference with the court to formalize final resolution of this
matter.
Sincerely,
Mark Shana
This e‐mail and any documents accompanying this e‐mail may contain information which is confidential
and/or legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named on this
e‐mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution,
or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this e‐mail information, is strictly prohibited and that
the documents should be returned to Saiber LLC immediately. In this regard, if you have received this e‐mail in
error, please notify us by return e‐mail or telephone (973‐622‐3333) immediately, delete the e‐mail and all
attachments and destroy all hard copies of same.
2
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 16 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
EXHIBIT C
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 17 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
Jakob B. Halpern
Salber ATTORNEYS AT LAW
973.622.8394
j halpern@saiber.com
October 5, 2018
BY FACSIMILE
Hon. Bridget A. Stecher, J.S.C.
ESSEX COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Hall of Records
465 Martin Luther King Blvd., Room 304
Newark, New Jersey 07102
Re: Shana v. Rite Aid Corp., et al.
Docket No. ESX-L-6979-14
NOT TO BE PLACED ON PUBLIC DOCKET
Dear Judge Stecher:
Our firm represents defendant Rite Aid Corporation ("Rite Aid") in this matter. We write
on behalf of Rite Aid to update the Court concerning the status of the parties' settlement
discussions. We are pleased to report that the parties have agreed to a settlement which includes
all of the material provisions that were listed for the Court during our September 26, 2018
conference before Your Honor, but is not premised on the contingency that Plaintiff had
originally raised with the Court.
The parties are in the process of preparing a formal settlement agreement, which will
include the filing of a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice with the Court at the appropriate
time.
We thank the Court for its consideration and assistance in this matter.
Respectfully submitted,
I
.~
Ff~;J_
Jakob B.
/jbh
c: Mark Shana, pro se (by email)
Saiber LlC • 18 Columbia Turnpike. Suite 200 • Florham Park, New Jersey • 07932-2266 • Tel 973.622.3333 • Fax 973.622.3349 • www.saiber.com
Florham Park • Newark • New York • Philadelphia
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 18 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
EXHIBIT D
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 19 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
Vincent C. Cirilli
From: Mark Shana
Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 5:42 PM
To: Jakob B. Halpern
Cc: Jennine DiSomma
Subject: Re: Shana v. Rite Aid
Mr. Halpern,
I was in the process of responding to your prior email by the time I read the email below, but I am okay
with the attached submission to the court.
Sincerely,
Mark Shana
From: Jakob B. Halpern
Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 5:27 PM
To: 'Mark Shana'
Cc: Jennine DiSomma
Subject: RE: Shana v. Rite Aid
Mr. Shana,
Please see the enclosed, which has been submitted to Judge Stecher.
Thanks,
Jake Halpern
Jakob B. Halpern
18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200
Florham Park, NJ 07932‐2266
One Gateway Center
10th Floor, Suite 1000
Newark, New Jersey 07102‐5311
Direct: 973‐622‐8394 | Firm: 973‐622‐3333 | Fax: 973‐286‐2465
Email: jhalpern@saiber.com | my profile | www.saiber.com
Florham Park | Newark | New York | Philadelphia
1
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 20 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
This e‐mail and any documents accompanying this e‐mail may contain information which is confidential
and/or legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named on this
e‐mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution,
or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this e‐mail information, is strictly prohibited and that
the documents should be returned to Saiber LLC immediately. In this regard, if you have received this e‐mail in
error, please notify us by return e‐mail or telephone (973‐622‐3333) immediately, delete the e‐mail and all
attachments and destroy all hard copies of same.
2
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 21 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
EXHIBIT E
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 22 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
MAZOUZSHANA
1317 Roger Avenue
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807 ,.
(732) 829- 9045 j.MDOOO@MSN.COM
Plaintiff I
l '
i .
·.. '
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
MAZOUZ SHANA, SOMERSET COUNTY: LAW DMSION
Plaintiff,
V. DOCKET NO.:
CIVIL ACTION
SAIBER, LLC,
RITE AID CORPORATION,
COMPLAINT
Defendants.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Plaintiff Mazouz (Mark) Shana, a resident of Somerset County, State of New Jersey, by
way of Complaint against Defendants, respectfully alleges as follows :
NATURE OF THE CASE
1. This action is instituted by the plaintiff to seek redress against defendants for their
tortuous conduct violating plaintiffs privacy under protections ofNew Jersey common law, New
Jersey Court Rules, New Jersey Identity Theft Prevention Act, N.J.S.A. 56:11-44, et seq. and
New Jersey Constitution, article I, paragraph 1: "All persons are by nature free and independent,
and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and
defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and of pursuing and
obtaining safety and happiness." N.J. Const. art. 1, par. 1. The New Jersey Supreme Court had
reaffirmed that the foregoing provision in our State's constitution guarantees to all the right to
pnvacy.
1
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 23 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
2. This action anses from defendants' improper and repeated public disclosures of
Plaintiffs full Social Security number ("SSN") and from defendants' continued failure to
expeditiously and effectively address their improper public disclosures of plaintiffs private facts.
3. By and through Defendant's tortuous actions and omissions as described herein, the
defendants have caused plaintiff damages and have subjected the plaintiff to the risk of identity
theft. Our state courts have clearly stated that our rights to privacy expressly provide New Jersey
citizens with the legal means to seek redress against all those who seek to undermine or violate
their privacy regardless of their status as public or private actors.
4. Our State Legislature noted the link between disclosure of SSNs and identity theft when
it passed the Identity Theft Prevention Act in 2005, a central purpose of which is to ensure that
the Social Security numbers of the citizens of New Jersey are less accessible in order to detect
and prevent identity theft. "It is [ ... ] a valid public purpose for the New Jersey Legislature to
ensure that the Social Security numbers of the citizens of the State of New Jersey are less
accessible in order to detect and prevent identity theft and to enact certain other protections and
remedies related thereto and thereby further the public safety." N.J.S.A. 56:11-45(h)
5. As the Federal Trade Commission has warned, people who obtain SSNs can impersonate
victims and use their social security numbers to facilitate the opening of new accounts, gain
access to existing accounts, commit medical identity theft, seek employment, and obtain
government benefits. FTC. Security in Numbers: SSNs & ID Theft 3 {2008).
6. One court described some of the risks associated with disclosure of a person SSN as
follows: " .. .armed with one's SSN, an unscrupulous individual could obtain a person's· welfare
benefits or Social Security benefits, order new checks at a new address on that person's checking
account, obtain credit cards, or even obtain the person's paycheck ...." Simply stated, the harm
2
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 24 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
that can be inflicted from the disclosure of a Social Security number to an unscrupulous person is
alarming and potentially financially ruinous.
PARTIES
7. Plaintiff Mazouz (Mark) Shana, hereinafter ("Shana") or ("plaintiff'') is a resident of
Somerset County, State of New Jersey, and was at all times relevant to this lawsuit a former
employee of defendant Rite Aid Corporation within the state of New Jersey. The plaintiff is a
consumer and a current and/ or former customer and/ or patient ofRite Aid Corporation.
8. Defendant Saiber LLC, hereinafter ("Saiber") is a law firm with principal offices at 18
Columbia Turnpike, Florham Park, New Jersey 07932.
9. Defendant Rite Aid Corporation ("Rite Aid") is a drug store chain and health care
provider that conducts business in the State of New Jersey including in Somerset County and
was at all times relevant to this action plaintiffs former employer.
VENUE
10. Venue is properly laid in Somerset County pursuant toR. 4:3-2(a)(3) and R. 4:3-2(b).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
11. On or about March 13, 2017, defendant Rite Aid filed documents, including a
supplemental Certification in purported further support of a motion for summary judgment tha
Rite Aid had filed in connection with a whistleblower lawsuit against it that the Plaintiff had
filed in Essex County Superior Court in 2014. The referenced Certification was prepared and
filed by an attorney at law at defendant Saiber on behalf of Rite Aid. The stated Certification
attached a document exhibit which contained plaintiff's full Social Security number ("SSN"). In
addition to containing Plaintiffs full Social Security number, the stated exhibit also contained-
on the same single sheet of paper-plaintiffs full name, plaintiffs full date of birth, his home
mailing address, his unlisted telephone number and his sex.
3
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 25 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
12. As a result ofthe referenced exhibit attachment being filed on the public civil docket, in
New Jersey Superior Court, defendants unreasonably published plaintiffs Social Security
number and related personal information.
13. As sated above, the improperly-submitted attachment contained additional personal
information directly linking plaintiffs Social Security number to plaintiffs name, date of birth,
mailing address, unlisted telephone number and sex, thus elevating the privacy concerns of
plaintiff.
14. The referenced exhibit attachment remained on the public civil docket for months before
the defendants belatedly moved before the court for replacement of said filing with a redacted
form following plaintiffs repeated protestations over defendants' above-described improper
disclosure.
15. Thereafter, the plaintiff repeatedly asked defendants to review their related pnor
submissions to the court in connection with plaintiffs referenced whistleblower claim and to take
proper and immediate action regarding any improperly submitted documents containing
plaintiffs private information that remain on the public civil docket.
16. Despite plaintiff's repeated requests, the defendant's have failed and/ or refused to do so,
and as a result of defendants' bad faith and unreasonable failure, plaintiff's Social Security
information and other private and personal identifiers has remained on the public civil docket to
plaintiff's detriment.
17. Defendants' above-described failure to expeditiously move to ameliorate their improper
disclosures of plaintiff's Social Security information is in its own right an ongoing violation of
plaintiff's privacy which has compounded plaintiff's damages.
4
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 26 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
18. The aforesaid publishing of plaintiffs private Social Security information is offensive to
the plaintiff whose private identifying information and the protection of its security from
strangers and unscrupulous individuals is material to plaintiffs credit, as well as his general
financial, emotional/ mental and physical wellbeing.
19. As a direct and proximate result of defendants' unreasonable actions and omissions, the
plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer damages to his legally-recognized right to
privacy in his personal and private affairs, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety,
fear, alarm, emotional distress and physical ailments.
CAUSE OF ACTION
INVASION OF PRIVACY
20. Plaintiff repeats the previous allegations as though fully set forth herein.
21 . The fact of plaintiffs full Social Security number is a private fact, which therefore is not
generally known to the public.
22. Plaintiff has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his Social Security number and other
private and personal affairs and concerns.
23. The procedural rules governing New Jersey Courts recognize that a person's Social
Security number and related information is private and prohibit submission to the court of such
personal identifiers:
Rule 1:38-7 Confidential Personal Identifiers
(a) Definition of Confidential Personal Identifiers. A confidential personal
identifier is a Social Security number [ ... ]
(b) Prohibition on Submission of Confidential Personal Identifiers to the Court.
A party shall not set forth confidential personal identifiers as defined in R.
1:38-7(a) in any document or pleading submitted to the court unless
otherwise required by statute, rule, administrative directive or court order
[.] .
5
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 27 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
(c) Compliance.
( 1) In every trial Division of the Superior Court where a Case Information
Statement is required, parties shall certify in the Case Information
Statement that all confidential personal identifiers have been redacted
and that subsequent papers submitted to the court will not .contain
confidential personal identifiers in accordance with the provisions of
this rule.
24. The facts in question disclosed by defendants as herein described are not a matter of
legitimate public concern.
25. Defendants publicly disclosed the private fact of plaintiffs full Social security number
and thereafter they have failed to expeditiously and fully remove that information from the civil
public docket despite plaintiffs repeated requests.
26. Defendants' publication of plaintiffs private facts in question is offensive to a reasonable
person of ordinary sensibilities like plaintiff.
27. Defendants' owed the plaintiff a duty of care including a duty not to publish plaintiffs
Social Security number, and as a result place the plaintiff at real risk of identity theft and various
other harm.
28. The actions of defendants and their failure to act expeditiously and affectively as herein
described were negligent, careless, reckless, willful, outrageous, wanton, and/ or in reckless
disregard of the law, rules of court and of plaintiff's rights warranting imposition of punitive
damages.
29. As a direct and proximate result of defendants' unlawful conduct, plaintiff has suffered
severe anxiety, alarm and constant worrying, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment,
emotional distress, bodily harm as well as other adverse effects upon his physical, mental and
emotional health and social life.
6
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 28 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants jointly, severally
and in the alternative, for the following:
A. Injunctive relief as follows:
1. An order compelling defendants to forthwith examine all documents that
the defendants had submitted to the court in connection with, and
throughout, the litigation of plaintiffs whistleblower claim filed in 2014;
and to identify any and all documents that contain any of plaintiffs
personal identifiers and which continue to be on the public civil docket un-
redacted.
2. An order compelling the defendants to forthwith replace any and all such
documents with redacted versions and/ or take similar measures pursuant
to the applicable court rules so that plaintiffs personal identifiers do not
remain on the public civil docket.
3. An order comp~lling the defendant's to comply with the rules applicable to
the courts of the state ofNew Jersey to promote the public interest.
4. Any other prospective injunctive relief that the Court deems just and
proper.
B . Compensatory damages;
C. Consequential damages;
D. Punitive damages;
E. Treble damages;
E. Attorneys' fees;
F. Costs of suit;
G. Interests (pre and post judgment);
/
H . Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, equita
DATED: March 8, 2019
7
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24
Preview
ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 1 of 3 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 Jennine DiSomma (Attorney ID: 028851984) Jakob B. Halpern (Attorney ID: 002582004) SAIBER LLC 18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200 Florham Park, New Jersey 07932-2266 T: (973) 622-3333 F: (973) 622-3349 Attorneys for Defendant Rite Aid Corporation MAZOUZ SHANA, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: ESSEX COUNTY Plaintiff, DOCKET NO.: ESX-L-6979-14 v. Civil Action RITE AID CORPORATION; NICOLE DEFENDANT RITE AID SCHRUBY; MICHELLE ALMONTE; CORPORATION’S HAEWON PARK; JOHN DOE #I-V AND NOTICE OF MOTION FOR JANE DOE #I-V, INDEMNIFICATION OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS Defendants. TO: Mazouz Shana 1317 Roger Avenue Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807 md000@msn.com Plaintiff (pro se) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on Friday, August 2, 2019 at 9:00 A.M., or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, the undersigned attorneys for defendant Rite Aid Corporation (“Rite Aid”), shall move before the Honorable Bridget A. Stecher, J.S.C., Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, Newark, New Jersey 07102, for an Order indemnifying Rite Aid for its reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs under the parties’ settlement agreement. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that in support of its motion, Rite Aid shall rely upon its Brief, the Certification of Jakob B. Halpern, Esq. (with exhibits), Reply papers submitted, and oral argument, if any. ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 2 of 3 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that a proposed form of Order is included herewith. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Rite Aid requests oral argument only if the motion is opposed. SAIBER LLC Attorneys for Defendant Rite Aid Corporation /s Jakob B. Halpern JAKOB B. HALPERN Dated: July 17, 2019 2 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 3 of 3 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on this date, I caused a copy of Rite Aid’s Notice of Motion for Indemnification of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, its Brief, the Certification of Jakob B. Halpern, Esq. (with exhibits), and a proposed form of Order to be sent by Email and Federal Express delivery to: Mazouz Shana 1317 Roger Avenue Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807 md000@msn.com Plaintiff (pro se) s/ Jakob B. Halpern JAKOB B. HALPERN Dated: July 17, 2019 3 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 1 of 2 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 MAZOUZ SHANA, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: ESSEX COUNTY Plaintiff, DOCKET NO.: ESX-L-6979-14 v. Civil Action RITE AID CORPORATION; NICOLE SCHRUBY; MICHELLE ALMONTE; ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT RITE HAEWON PARK; JOHN DOE #I-V AND AID CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR JANE DOE #1-V, INDEMNIFICATION OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS Defendants. THIS MATTER having been opened to the Court by Saiber LLC, attorneys for defendant Rite Aid Corporation (“Rite Aid”), on notice to all parties having appeared, for the entry of an Order granting its Motion for Indemnification of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs; and the Court having considered all papers submitted in support of the motion and all opposition thereto, if any; and the Court having heard oral argument, if any; and for good cause having been shown, IT IS on this _________ day of ______________, 2019; ORDERED that Rite Aid’s Motion for Indemnification of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs be and is hereby GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that, pursuant to the indemnification provision in the parties’ settlement agreement, Plaintiff shall indemnify Rite Aid for its reasonable fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation captioned Shana v. Saiber LLC and Rite Aid Corporation, Docket No. SOM-L- 312-19, in the amount of $16,909.00 within fourteen (14) days of entry of this Order; and it is further ORDERED that, pursuant to the indemnification provision in the parties’ settlement agreement, Plaintiff shall indemnify Rite Aid for its reasonable fees and costs incurred in ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 2 of 2 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 connection with this Motion for Indemnification within fourteen (14) days of entry of this Order; and it is further ORDERED that Rite Aid shall file and serve a certification setting forth the full amount of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in connection with this Motion for Indemnification within seven (7) days of the entry of this Order; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff shall remit a check or money order payable to Rite Aid Corporation for $16,909.00 plus the amount set forth in the certification required by the preceding paragraph within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this Order by service to Rite Aid’s outside counsel, Saiber LLC, 18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200, Florham Park, NJ 07932, Attn: Jakob B. Halpern, Esq.; and it is further ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be served upon all parties within ____ days of the date on which it is received by counsel for Rite Aid. __________________________________________ HONORABLE BRIDGET A. STECHER, J.S.C. _____ Opposed _____ Unopposed 2 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 1 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 Jennine DiSomma (Attorney ID: 028851984) Jakob B. Halpern (Attorney ID: 002582004) SAIBER LLC 18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200 Florham Park, New Jersey 07932-2266 T: (973) 622-3333 F: (973) 622-3349 Attorneys for Defendant Rite Aid Corporation MAZOUZ SHANA, SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: ESSEX COUNTY Plaintiff, DOCKET NO.: ESX-L-6979-14 v. Civil Action RITE AID CORPORATION; NICOLE CERTIFICATION OF JAKOB B. SCHRUBY; MICHELLE ALMONTE; HALPERN, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF HAEWON PARK; JOHN DOE #I-V AND DEFENDANT RITE AID JANE DOE #I-V, CORPORATION’S MOTION FOR INDEMNIFICATION OF ATTORNEYS’ Defendants. FEES AND COSTS JAKOB B. HALPERN, of full age, hereby certifies as follows: 1. I am an attorney-at-law of the State of New Jersey and Member of the firm Saiber LLC, attorneys for defendant Rite Aid Corporation (“Rite Aid”) in this matter. 2. I am fully familiar with the matters set forth herein and submit this Certification in support of Rite Aid’s Motion for Indemnification of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. A. Factual Background 3. In 2014, Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against Rite Aid (“Shana I”) in this Court. 4. On September 26, 2018, the parties appeared at a noticed pretrial conference before the Honorable Bridget Stecher, J.S.C. At the conclusion of the pretrial conference, Judge Stecher presided over a settlement conference, which was held off the record but in the ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 2 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 courtroom. At the conclusion of this process, the parties agreed to a settlement. Plaintiff indicated his acceptance of the settlement was contingent upon being satisfied with the tax treatment of the settlement, and on October 4, 2018, he indicated both the Court (by telephone) and to Rite Aid (by email to me) that he was indeed satisfied with such tax treatment and thus had accepted the settlement. 5. On October 5, 2018, I emailed Plaintiff on behalf Rite Aid stating: In order for us to evaluate your email, please confirm by return email that it is your intent to settle this matter on the terms discussed before Judge Stecher on Wednesday, which include the following material provisions that were listed for the Court: The material terms listed in the email included (but were not limited to): You [Plaintiff] will provide a full general release of all claims you made and which you could have made against Rite Aid and its affiliated entities and individuals Covenant not to sue Indemnification provisions for violation of the above A true and correct copy of my October 5, 2018 email setting forth these material terms is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 6. On the same day, October 5, 2018, Plaintiff responded by email, stating: Yes, it is my intent to settle this action pursuant to the terms discussed before judge Stecher on September 26, 2018 as indicated below. (Emphasis added.) The terms “indicated below” are those found in my October 5, 2018 email (attached as Exhibit A), the material text of which is set forth in the preceding paragraph. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s October 5, 2018 email is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 7. Upon receipt of Plaintiff’s October 5, 2018 email, our firm sent a letter to Judge Stecher informing Her Honor that the matter had settled and that the settlement: 2 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 3 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 include[d] all of the material provisions that were listed for the Court during our September 26, 2018 conference before Your Honor. (Emphasis added). A true and correct copy of Rite Aid’s October 5, 2018 letter to the Court is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 8. When he received the service copy of the letter found at Exhibit C, Plaintiff responded to me by email a short time later on October 5, 2018, stating: I am okay with the attached submission to the court. (Emphasis added). A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s October 5, 2018 email is attached hereto as Exhibit D. 9. Notwithstanding the settlement discussed above, on March 8, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against Rite Aid and Saiber, Rite Aid’s attorneys in Shana I, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Somerset County, bearing docket number SOM-L-312-19 (“Shana II”). A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Complaint in Shana II is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 10. Rite Aid learned of the Shana II lawsuit shortly after Saiber was served with the Complaint on March 21, 2019. 11. Upon learning of the lawsuit, Rite Aid retained Saiber for its defense, and commenced a vigorous defense against Plaintiff’s claims, which it believed were not only barred by the settlement agreement but independently lacking in any merit whatsoever. Indeed, given that Rule 4:6-1(a) required the filing of a pleading or motion responsive to the Complaint within 35 days after its service, work on the defense in Shana II commenced immediately. 12. In connection with the defense of Shana II, Saiber analyzed Plaintiff’s pleadings, developed legal strategy, conducted legal research into Plaintiff’s claims, prepared a Rule 1:4-8 frivolous litigation letter, drafted a motion to dismiss, and performed other related and necessary tasks with respect to preparing a thorough defense in that matter. 3 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 4 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 13. A true and correct copy of the April 1, 2019 Rule 1:4-8 letter, that was served on Plaintiff in Shana II, is attached hereto as Exhibit F. 14. On April 10, 2019, Rite Aid filed its motion before this Court seeking an Order enforcing the settlement agreement. A true and correct copy of Rite Aid’s Notice of Motion is attached hereto as Exhibit G. 15. On April 12, 2019, before the responsive pleading deadline in Shana II, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint adding a new claim. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint in Shana II is attached hereto as Exhibit H. 16. Rite Aid was served with Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint in Shana II on May 1, 2019. 17. The new claim that had been added to the Amended Complaint required additional legal research and added to the arguments requiring dismissal in Rite Aid’s draft Motion to Dismiss. 18. On May 10, 2019, the parties appeared before Judge Stecher to argue Rite Aid’s Motion to Enforce Settlement. During oral argument, Judge Stecher stated, “I’m ruling that [the Shana II lawsuit is] in violation of the agreement.” Judge Stecher emphasized that Her Honor had found Plaintiff’s conduct in taking “four months to decide that you were going to [attempt to] disavow a settlement [to be] completely disturbing to the Court.” Finally, Her Honor invited Rite Aid to separately file the within motion for indemnification of its attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to the settlement agreement’s indemnification provision. During the hearing, Plaintiff indicated that he intended to appeal the Court’s order on the motion to enforce settlement. A true and correct copy of relevant excerpts of the transcript of the May 10, 2019 hearing before Judge Stecher is attached hereto as Exhibit I. 4 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 5 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 19. Thereafter, also on May 10, 2019, the Court issued an Order granting Rite Aid’s motion to enforce the settlement agreement (which incorporated a signed version of Rite Aid’s confirmatory email also found at Exhibit A). Among other things, that Order stated: Rite Aid and plaintiff Mazouz Shana are bound by a valid and enforceable settlement agreement containing the following material terms: . . . [1] Plaintiff will provide a full general release of all claims he made and which he could have made against Rite Aid and its affiliated entities and individuals; . . . [2] A covenant not to sue; and [3] Indemnification provision for violation of any of the above. In addition, Order expressly stated that Shana II: hereby violates the terms of the parties’ valid and enforceable settlement agreement, including the general release and covenant not to sue. Finally, the Court ordered that: by motion for fees with notice to Shana, counsel for Rite Aid shall provide Shana with a certification or certifications indicating the amount of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of Shana II following the completion of Shana II, and the Court will thereafter rule as to same. A true and correct copy of the Court’s May 10, 2019 Order is attached hereto as Exhibit J. 20. Because Plaintiff had indicated that he intended to appeal the Court’s May 10, 2019 Order, on May 12, 2019, the parties signed a stipulation to extend the time for Rite Aid and Saiber to respond to the Amended Complaint in Shana II for an additional 60 days to avoid incurring additional attorneys’ fees and costs in connection with that lawsuit while Plaintiff’s appeal was pending. 21. Rite Aid’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint was nearly complete by this time. 5 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 6 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 22. After that stipulation was signed, Rite Aid’s counsel ceased performing any additional work – and thus incurring any fees – in preparation of its defense in Shana II. 23. Ultimately, Plaintiff never filed a Notice of Appeal, and his time to do so has since expired. 24. Instead, on June 28, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Shana II. A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal is attached hereto as Exhibit K. 25. After receipt of Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, Rite Aid promptly prepared and filed the within motion, consistent with Judge Stecher’s previous instructions. B. Reasonable Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Incurred in Defense of Shana II 26. The following attorneys and paralegal rendered billed services in connection with the defense of Shana II: a. Arnold B. Calmann, who is a Member of Saiber. He graduated from Syracuse University College of Law in 1972 and has over 45 years of legal experience. Mr. Calmann exercised ultimate supervision over the matter given his relationship with Rite Aid. b. Jennine DiSomma, who is a Member of Saiber. She graduated from Seton Hall University School of Law in 1984 and has over 30 years of legal experience. Ms. DiSomma was the senior partner responsible for defense of the matter. c. Jakob B. Halpern, who is a Member of Saiber. He graduated, magna cum laude, from Georgetown University Law Center in 2004 and has 15 years of legal experience. Mr. Halpern was the junior partner responsible for defense of the matter. 6 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 7 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 d. Vincent C. Cirilli, who is an Associate at Saiber. He graduated, with honors, from The George Washington University Law School in 2014 and has 5 years of legal experience. e. Rebecca Williams, who is a Paralegal at Saiber. She graduated from an ABA approved paralegal program at Bergen Community College in 2006 and has 13 years of paralegal experience. 27. Mr. Calmann’s standard hourly rate is $625, which was the rate charged in connection with the defense of Shana II. 28. Ms. DiSomma’s standard hourly rate is $435, which was the rate charged in connection with the defense of Shana II. 29. Mr. Halpern’s standard hourly rate is $360, which was the rate charged in connection with the defense of Shana II. 30. Mr. Cirilli’s standard hourly rate is $235, which was the rate charged in connection with the defense of Shana II. 31. Ms. Williams’ standard hourly rate is $160, which was the rate charged in connection with the defense of Shana II. 32. The foregoing hourly rates, which have been charged in this case, are entirely reasonable. During my 15 years of practice – 13 of which have been at Saiber in New Jersey – I have served as lead counsel, cocounsel and local counsel in all types of matters litigated in both New Jersey state courts and the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, including commercial disputes and more particularly employment disputes. I have also worked with and continue to work closely with or adversely to other commercial and employment 7 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 8 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 litigation attorneys who practice in New Jersey. In that capacity, I have become extremely familiar with the hourly billing rates charged by those attorneys for comparable cases. 33. Based upon my knowledge and experience, the hourly rates charged by Saiber are comparable to the prevailing rates generally charged by other attorneys and law firms with whom I have worked close or adversely to, taking into account the skills of the Saiber attorneys and the level of experience of those attorneys. Indeed, many of the employment litigation attorneys who I have worked with or against, whose skills and experience are comparable to those of the Saiber attorneys, had rates that were substantially similar to or higher than those of the Saiber attorneys. 34. Similarly, the tasks undertaken by the Saiber attorneys, as well as the time to complete such tasks, in defense of Shana II were both reasonable and necessary given Plaintiff’s lawsuit and to defend against his barred and unmeritorious claims. 35. The total fees billed in Shana II though dismissal – with those fees incurred in the tasks discussed in Paragraphs 11-18, supra – were $16,909.00. 36. In light of Plaintiff’s conduct and his violation of the express terms of the settlement agreement, Rite Aid was also compelled to prepare and file the present motion. The same attorneys listed above participated in the preparation of this motion, and their time was billed at the same reasonable rates previously discussed. Again, this was reasonable and necessary given Plaintiff’s conduct and responsibility for Rite Aid’s unnecessary incursion of additional attorney’s fees. 37. The total fees (both that have been and/or will be billed to Rite Aid) in connection with the present motion through yesterday are $5,283.00. In addition to this amount, Rite Aid also requests that it be indemnified for any additional fees it incurs in connection with the briefing and argument of this motion, and any future appeal by Plaintiff. 8 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 9 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 38. None of the fees and costs that Rite Aid requests be indemnified for include any actions that were undertaken in connection with Rite Aid’s motion to enforce settlement in Shana I. C. Unpublished Authority 39. A true and correct copy of the Court’s decision in Kitchen King, Inc. v. Scisco, 2013 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2556 (App. Div. Oct. 23, 2013), is attached hereto as Exhibit L. 40. A true and correct copy of the Court’s decision in In re Estate of Vnencak, 2008 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1114 (App. Div. Feb. 29, 2008), is attached hereto as Exhibit M. 41. A true and correct copy of the Court’s decision in Jobar Realty, Inc. v. Ryan, 2007 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 826 (App. Div. Dec. 21, 2007), is attached hereto as Exhibit N. 42. A true and correct copy of the Court’s decision in Pedraza v. Alameda Unified Sch. Dist., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41096 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2012), is attached hereto as Exhibit O. I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. /s Jakob B. Halpern JAKOB B. HALPERN Dated: July 17, 2019 9 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 10 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 EXHIBIT A ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 11 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 Vincent C. Cirilli From: Jakob B. Halpern Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 9:58 AM To: 'Mark Shana' Cc: Jennine DiSomma Subject: RE: Shana v. Rite Aid Mr. Shana, In order for us to evaluate your email, please confirm by return email that it is your intent to settle this matter on the terms discussed before Judge Stecher on Wednesday, which include the following material provisions that were listed for the Court: Rite Aid will resolve the matter for $ to be paid to you Rite Aid to issue you a 1099-MISC for that amount Rite Aid and its attorneys are providing no advice as to the taxation of that payment and will comply with all legal, procedural and ethical obligations in connection with same You will provide a full general release of all claims you made and which you could have made against Rite Aid and its affiliated entities and individuals An acceptable confidentiality provision Rite Aid will respond to employment verification requests only to confirm your employment and provide dates of employment, final position held and final salary A non-disparagement clause Your representation that Plaintiff has filed no other lawsuits, administrative claims, complaints of Board of Pharmacy violations, etc. Covenant not to sue Indemnification provisions for violation of the above Thank you, Jake Halpern From: Mark Shana [mailto:md000@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 2:38 PM To: Jakob B. Halpern Subject: Shana v. Rite Aid Mr. Halpern, I write to advise that the Plaintiff has decided to accept the settlement that was reached before judge Stecher on September 26, 2018. I telephoned judge Stecher's Chambers a short while ago this afternoon and informed the court of plaintiff's decision. I also advised the court that I will be sending this email to counsel and proposing that the parties request a brief conference with the court to formalize final resolution of this matter. 1 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 12 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 Sincerely, Mark Shana 2 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 13 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 EXHIBIT B ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 14 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 Vincent C. Cirilli From: Mark Shana Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 12:03 PM To: Jakob B. Halpern Subject: Re: Shana v. Rite Aid Mr. Halpern, Yes, it is my intent to settle this action pursuant to the terms discussed before judge Stecher on September 26, 2018 as indicated below. Sincerely, Mark Shana From: Jakob B. Halpern Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 9:58 AM To: 'Mark Shana' Cc: Jennine DiSomma Subject: RE: Shana v. Rite Aid Mr. Shana, In order for us to evaluate your email, please confirm by return email that it is your intent to settle this matter on the terms discussed before Judge Stecher on Wednesday, which include the following material provisions that were listed for the Court: Rite Aid will resolve the matter for $ to be paid to you Rite Aid to issue you a 1099-MISC for that amount Rite Aid and its attorneys are providing no advice as to the taxation of that payment and will comply with all legal, procedural and ethical obligations in connection with same You will provide a full general release of all claims you made and which you could have made against Rite Aid and its affiliated entities and individuals An acceptable confidentiality provision Rite Aid will respond to employment verification requests only to confirm your employment and provide dates of employment, final position held and final salary A non-disparagement clause Your representation that Plaintiff has filed no other lawsuits, administrative claims, complaints of Board of Pharmacy violations, etc. Covenant not to sue Indemnification provisions for violation of the above Thank you, 1 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 15 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 Jake Halpern From: Mark Shana [mailto:md000@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 2:38 PM To: Jakob B. Halpern Subject: Shana v. Rite Aid Mr. Halpern, I write to advise that the Plaintiff has decided to accept the settlement that was reached before judge Stecher on September 26, 2018. I telephoned judge Stecher's Chambers a short while ago this afternoon and informed the court of plaintiff's decision. I also advised the court that I will be sending this email to counsel and proposing that the parties request a brief conference with the court to formalize final resolution of this matter. Sincerely, Mark Shana This e‐mail and any documents accompanying this e‐mail may contain information which is confidential and/or legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named on this e‐mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this e‐mail information, is strictly prohibited and that the documents should be returned to Saiber LLC immediately. In this regard, if you have received this e‐mail in error, please notify us by return e‐mail or telephone (973‐622‐3333) immediately, delete the e‐mail and all attachments and destroy all hard copies of same. 2 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 16 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 EXHIBIT C ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 17 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 Jakob B. Halpern Salber ATTORNEYS AT LAW 973.622.8394 j halpern@saiber.com October 5, 2018 BY FACSIMILE Hon. Bridget A. Stecher, J.S.C. ESSEX COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Hall of Records 465 Martin Luther King Blvd., Room 304 Newark, New Jersey 07102 Re: Shana v. Rite Aid Corp., et al. Docket No. ESX-L-6979-14 NOT TO BE PLACED ON PUBLIC DOCKET Dear Judge Stecher: Our firm represents defendant Rite Aid Corporation ("Rite Aid") in this matter. We write on behalf of Rite Aid to update the Court concerning the status of the parties' settlement discussions. We are pleased to report that the parties have agreed to a settlement which includes all of the material provisions that were listed for the Court during our September 26, 2018 conference before Your Honor, but is not premised on the contingency that Plaintiff had originally raised with the Court. The parties are in the process of preparing a formal settlement agreement, which will include the filing of a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice with the Court at the appropriate time. We thank the Court for its consideration and assistance in this matter. Respectfully submitted, I .~ Ff~;J_ Jakob B. /jbh c: Mark Shana, pro se (by email) Saiber LlC • 18 Columbia Turnpike. Suite 200 • Florham Park, New Jersey • 07932-2266 • Tel 973.622.3333 • Fax 973.622.3349 • www.saiber.com Florham Park • Newark • New York • Philadelphia ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 18 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 EXHIBIT D ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 19 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 Vincent C. Cirilli From: Mark Shana Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 5:42 PM To: Jakob B. Halpern Cc: Jennine DiSomma Subject: Re: Shana v. Rite Aid Mr. Halpern, I was in the process of responding to your prior email by the time I read the email below, but I am okay with the attached submission to the court. Sincerely, Mark Shana From: Jakob B. Halpern Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 5:27 PM To: 'Mark Shana' Cc: Jennine DiSomma Subject: RE: Shana v. Rite Aid Mr. Shana, Please see the enclosed, which has been submitted to Judge Stecher. Thanks, Jake Halpern Jakob B. Halpern 18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200 Florham Park, NJ 07932‐2266 One Gateway Center 10th Floor, Suite 1000 Newark, New Jersey 07102‐5311 Direct: 973‐622‐8394 | Firm: 973‐622‐3333 | Fax: 973‐286‐2465 Email: jhalpern@saiber.com | my profile | www.saiber.com Florham Park | Newark | New York | Philadelphia 1 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 20 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 This e‐mail and any documents accompanying this e‐mail may contain information which is confidential and/or legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named on this e‐mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this e‐mail information, is strictly prohibited and that the documents should be returned to Saiber LLC immediately. In this regard, if you have received this e‐mail in error, please notify us by return e‐mail or telephone (973‐622‐3333) immediately, delete the e‐mail and all attachments and destroy all hard copies of same. 2 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 21 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 EXHIBIT E ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 22 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 MAZOUZSHANA 1317 Roger Avenue Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807 ,. (732) 829- 9045 j.MDOOO@MSN.COM Plaintiff I l ' i . ·.. ' SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY MAZOUZ SHANA, SOMERSET COUNTY: LAW DMSION Plaintiff, V. DOCKET NO.: CIVIL ACTION SAIBER, LLC, RITE AID CORPORATION, COMPLAINT Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Plaintiff Mazouz (Mark) Shana, a resident of Somerset County, State of New Jersey, by way of Complaint against Defendants, respectfully alleges as follows : NATURE OF THE CASE 1. This action is instituted by the plaintiff to seek redress against defendants for their tortuous conduct violating plaintiffs privacy under protections ofNew Jersey common law, New Jersey Court Rules, New Jersey Identity Theft Prevention Act, N.J.S.A. 56:11-44, et seq. and New Jersey Constitution, article I, paragraph 1: "All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness." N.J. Const. art. 1, par. 1. The New Jersey Supreme Court had reaffirmed that the foregoing provision in our State's constitution guarantees to all the right to pnvacy. 1 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 23 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 2. This action anses from defendants' improper and repeated public disclosures of Plaintiffs full Social Security number ("SSN") and from defendants' continued failure to expeditiously and effectively address their improper public disclosures of plaintiffs private facts. 3. By and through Defendant's tortuous actions and omissions as described herein, the defendants have caused plaintiff damages and have subjected the plaintiff to the risk of identity theft. Our state courts have clearly stated that our rights to privacy expressly provide New Jersey citizens with the legal means to seek redress against all those who seek to undermine or violate their privacy regardless of their status as public or private actors. 4. Our State Legislature noted the link between disclosure of SSNs and identity theft when it passed the Identity Theft Prevention Act in 2005, a central purpose of which is to ensure that the Social Security numbers of the citizens of New Jersey are less accessible in order to detect and prevent identity theft. "It is [ ... ] a valid public purpose for the New Jersey Legislature to ensure that the Social Security numbers of the citizens of the State of New Jersey are less accessible in order to detect and prevent identity theft and to enact certain other protections and remedies related thereto and thereby further the public safety." N.J.S.A. 56:11-45(h) 5. As the Federal Trade Commission has warned, people who obtain SSNs can impersonate victims and use their social security numbers to facilitate the opening of new accounts, gain access to existing accounts, commit medical identity theft, seek employment, and obtain government benefits. FTC. Security in Numbers: SSNs & ID Theft 3 {2008). 6. One court described some of the risks associated with disclosure of a person SSN as follows: " .. .armed with one's SSN, an unscrupulous individual could obtain a person's· welfare benefits or Social Security benefits, order new checks at a new address on that person's checking account, obtain credit cards, or even obtain the person's paycheck ...." Simply stated, the harm 2 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 24 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 that can be inflicted from the disclosure of a Social Security number to an unscrupulous person is alarming and potentially financially ruinous. PARTIES 7. Plaintiff Mazouz (Mark) Shana, hereinafter ("Shana") or ("plaintiff'') is a resident of Somerset County, State of New Jersey, and was at all times relevant to this lawsuit a former employee of defendant Rite Aid Corporation within the state of New Jersey. The plaintiff is a consumer and a current and/ or former customer and/ or patient ofRite Aid Corporation. 8. Defendant Saiber LLC, hereinafter ("Saiber") is a law firm with principal offices at 18 Columbia Turnpike, Florham Park, New Jersey 07932. 9. Defendant Rite Aid Corporation ("Rite Aid") is a drug store chain and health care provider that conducts business in the State of New Jersey including in Somerset County and was at all times relevant to this action plaintiffs former employer. VENUE 10. Venue is properly laid in Somerset County pursuant toR. 4:3-2(a)(3) and R. 4:3-2(b). FACTUAL BACKGROUND 11. On or about March 13, 2017, defendant Rite Aid filed documents, including a supplemental Certification in purported further support of a motion for summary judgment tha Rite Aid had filed in connection with a whistleblower lawsuit against it that the Plaintiff had filed in Essex County Superior Court in 2014. The referenced Certification was prepared and filed by an attorney at law at defendant Saiber on behalf of Rite Aid. The stated Certification attached a document exhibit which contained plaintiff's full Social Security number ("SSN"). In addition to containing Plaintiffs full Social Security number, the stated exhibit also contained- on the same single sheet of paper-plaintiffs full name, plaintiffs full date of birth, his home mailing address, his unlisted telephone number and his sex. 3 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 25 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 12. As a result ofthe referenced exhibit attachment being filed on the public civil docket, in New Jersey Superior Court, defendants unreasonably published plaintiffs Social Security number and related personal information. 13. As sated above, the improperly-submitted attachment contained additional personal information directly linking plaintiffs Social Security number to plaintiffs name, date of birth, mailing address, unlisted telephone number and sex, thus elevating the privacy concerns of plaintiff. 14. The referenced exhibit attachment remained on the public civil docket for months before the defendants belatedly moved before the court for replacement of said filing with a redacted form following plaintiffs repeated protestations over defendants' above-described improper disclosure. 15. Thereafter, the plaintiff repeatedly asked defendants to review their related pnor submissions to the court in connection with plaintiffs referenced whistleblower claim and to take proper and immediate action regarding any improperly submitted documents containing plaintiffs private information that remain on the public civil docket. 16. Despite plaintiff's repeated requests, the defendant's have failed and/ or refused to do so, and as a result of defendants' bad faith and unreasonable failure, plaintiff's Social Security information and other private and personal identifiers has remained on the public civil docket to plaintiff's detriment. 17. Defendants' above-described failure to expeditiously move to ameliorate their improper disclosures of plaintiff's Social Security information is in its own right an ongoing violation of plaintiff's privacy which has compounded plaintiff's damages. 4 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 26 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 18. The aforesaid publishing of plaintiffs private Social Security information is offensive to the plaintiff whose private identifying information and the protection of its security from strangers and unscrupulous individuals is material to plaintiffs credit, as well as his general financial, emotional/ mental and physical wellbeing. 19. As a direct and proximate result of defendants' unreasonable actions and omissions, the plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer damages to his legally-recognized right to privacy in his personal and private affairs, mental anguish, humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety, fear, alarm, emotional distress and physical ailments. CAUSE OF ACTION INVASION OF PRIVACY 20. Plaintiff repeats the previous allegations as though fully set forth herein. 21 . The fact of plaintiffs full Social Security number is a private fact, which therefore is not generally known to the public. 22. Plaintiff has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his Social Security number and other private and personal affairs and concerns. 23. The procedural rules governing New Jersey Courts recognize that a person's Social Security number and related information is private and prohibit submission to the court of such personal identifiers: Rule 1:38-7 Confidential Personal Identifiers (a) Definition of Confidential Personal Identifiers. A confidential personal identifier is a Social Security number [ ... ] (b) Prohibition on Submission of Confidential Personal Identifiers to the Court. A party shall not set forth confidential personal identifiers as defined in R. 1:38-7(a) in any document or pleading submitted to the court unless otherwise required by statute, rule, administrative directive or court order [.] . 5 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 27 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 (c) Compliance. ( 1) In every trial Division of the Superior Court where a Case Information Statement is required, parties shall certify in the Case Information Statement that all confidential personal identifiers have been redacted and that subsequent papers submitted to the court will not .contain confidential personal identifiers in accordance with the provisions of this rule. 24. The facts in question disclosed by defendants as herein described are not a matter of legitimate public concern. 25. Defendants publicly disclosed the private fact of plaintiffs full Social security number and thereafter they have failed to expeditiously and fully remove that information from the civil public docket despite plaintiffs repeated requests. 26. Defendants' publication of plaintiffs private facts in question is offensive to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities like plaintiff. 27. Defendants' owed the plaintiff a duty of care including a duty not to publish plaintiffs Social Security number, and as a result place the plaintiff at real risk of identity theft and various other harm. 28. The actions of defendants and their failure to act expeditiously and affectively as herein described were negligent, careless, reckless, willful, outrageous, wanton, and/ or in reckless disregard of the law, rules of court and of plaintiff's rights warranting imposition of punitive damages. 29. As a direct and proximate result of defendants' unlawful conduct, plaintiff has suffered severe anxiety, alarm and constant worrying, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment, emotional distress, bodily harm as well as other adverse effects upon his physical, mental and emotional health and social life. 6 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24:08 AM Pg 28 of 95 Trans ID: LCV20191237769 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants jointly, severally and in the alternative, for the following: A. Injunctive relief as follows: 1. An order compelling defendants to forthwith examine all documents that the defendants had submitted to the court in connection with, and throughout, the litigation of plaintiffs whistleblower claim filed in 2014; and to identify any and all documents that contain any of plaintiffs personal identifiers and which continue to be on the public civil docket un- redacted. 2. An order compelling the defendants to forthwith replace any and all such documents with redacted versions and/ or take similar measures pursuant to the applicable court rules so that plaintiffs personal identifiers do not remain on the public civil docket. 3. An order comp~lling the defendant's to comply with the rules applicable to the courts of the state ofNew Jersey to promote the public interest. 4. Any other prospective injunctive relief that the Court deems just and proper. B . Compensatory damages; C. Consequential damages; D. Punitive damages; E. Treble damages; E. Attorneys' fees; F. Costs of suit; G. Interests (pre and post judgment); / H . Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, equita DATED: March 8, 2019 7 ESX-L-006979-14 07/17/2019 10:24