Preview
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2023 02:23 PM INDEX NO. 601443/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 41 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2023
STATE OF NEW YORK
SUPREME COURT: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
________________________________________
RYAN THODEN,
Plaintiff, ANSWER TO AMENDED
COMPLAINT
v.
Index No.: 601443/2023
HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP,
K&B QUALITY SERVICES INC.,
MAJOR LEAGUE TRANSPORTATION LLC,
and R.M. PARADAZELYA,
Defendants.
________________________________________
Defendants, HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP., K&B QUALITY SERVICES, INC., and
R.M. PARADAZELYA, by their attorneys, HAGELIN SPENCER LLC, for their Answer to
Plaintiff’s Amended Verified Complaint, herein alleges upon information and belief:
FIRST: Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs 7, 8, 33, 34, 43, 44, 46, 57, 58,
59, 64, 65, 66, 78, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, and 88 of the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
SECOND: Deny having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations contained in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 52, 53, 54,
55, 56, 60, 61, 62, 63, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, and 81 the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
THIRD: Admit the allegations contained in paragraphs 36 and 51 of the Plaintiff’s
Complaint.
FOURTH: Deny each and every allegation of Plaintiff’s Complaint not hereinbefore
specifically admitted, denied, or otherwise controverted.
FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE:
FIFTH: That upon information and belief, the accident, and/or injuries, and/or
damages, as alleged in the Complaint, which were sustained by the Plaintiff were caused in whole
or in part or were contributed to by the culpable conduct and want of care on the part of the
Plaintiff's negligence, and/or Plaintiff's assumption of the risk, without any negligence or fault or
want of care on the part of these answering Defendants.
FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE:
SIXTH: That upon information and belief, all or part of the cost of Plaintiff's medical
care, loss of earnings, or other economic loss may have been paid, replaced or indemnified in
1 of 3
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2023 02:23 PM INDEX NO. 601443/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 41 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2023
whole or in part from collateral sources or with reasonable certainty, will be replaced or
indemnified in the future from such collateral sources and to that extent, these Defendants request
that in the event Plaintiff recovers any judgment herein, that such amounts as have been or may be
recovered in whole or in part from collateral sources be determined by the court and the amounts
Plaintiff recovers be reduced by said amounts.
FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE:
SEVENTH: That upon information and belief, the Plaintiff did not sustain a serious
injury as defined in Section 5102(d) of the Insurance Law of the State of New York and has not
sustained economic loss greater than basic economic loss as defined in Section 5102(a) of the
Insurance Law of the State of New York.
FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE:
EIGHTH: That upon information and belief, the vehicle which was occupied by the
Plaintiff at the time of the incident complained of in the Complaint, was equipped with seat belts
and/or harnesses, the use of which would have prevented or substantially reduced the Plaintiff's
injuries, but upon information and belief the Plaintiff did not make use of such a device(s). That
the Plaintiff's failure to wear such safety equipment was a contributing factor to his/her/their
injuries, if any.
FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE:
NINTH: That upon information and belief, the accident in issue may have been
caused by an emergency situation created in the absence of negligence on the part of these
Defendants, and they are, therefore, free of negligence as a matter of law.
FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE:
TENTH: That upon information and belief, the claim of the Plaintiff is frivolous as
a matter of law entitling these Defendants to an award of costs and disbursements pursuant to
CPLR § 8303-a.
FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE:
ELEVENTH: That if the vehicle being operated by the Defendant R.M.
PARADAZELYA was leased by the Defendant K&B QUALITY SERVICES INC., from the
Defendant HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, then, upon information and belief any cause of action
against HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, is null and void pursuant to United States Code Title 49,
Chapter 301, Subchapter 1, §30106. (The Graves Amendment).
2 of 3
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2023 02:23 PM INDEX NO. 601443/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 41 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2023
FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE:
TWELFTH: That if the vehicle being operated by the Defendant R.M.
PARADAZELYA was owned by the Defendant K&B QUALITY SERVICES INC. and financed
through Defendant HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, then, upon information and belief any cause
of action against HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, is null and void pursuant to United States Code
Title 49, Chapter 301, Subchapter 1, §30106. (The Graves Amendment).
FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
AND BY WAY OF A CROSSCLAIM, THIS
ANSWERING DEFENDANT HEREIN ALLEGES:
TWELFTH: That if the Plaintiff sustained injuries and damages as alleged in the
Complaint, by reason of fault other than his own, and judgment is recovered against these
answering Defendants, then the liability of said Defendants will have been brought on by reason
of the primary negligence of the Co-Defendant, MAJOR LEAGUE TRANSPORTATION LLC,
without any negligence on the part of these answering Defendants, who is thereby entitled to
indemnity, common law and contractual, and/or contribution from, and judgment over and against
the Co-Defendant for such liability or such proportionate share that represents the amount, degree
or kind of negligence attributable to the Defendants. These Defendants also claim contingent
benefit upon any future compromise or settlement between the Co-Defendant and the Plaintiff
pursuant to the provisions of General Obligations Law §15-108 as they may apply to any such
compromise or settlement.
WHEREFORE, these Defendants demand judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s Complaint,
and further demands that the ultimate rights of the parties be determined, and these Defendants
demand the costs and disbursements of this action.
DATED: December 27, 2023
___________________________________
Megan F. Organek, Esq.
HAGELIN SPENCER LLC
Attorneys for Defendants
135 Delaware Avenue, Suite 200
Buffalo, New York 14202
(716) 849-3500
TO: Jonathan Shalom, Esq.
SHALOM LAW, PLLC
Attorneys for Plaintiff
105-13 Metropolitan Avenue
Forest Hills, New York 11375
(718) 971-9474
- COUNSEL FOR CO-DEFENDANT AS THEY MAY APPEAR -
3 of 3
Preview
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2023 02:23 PM INDEX NO. 601443/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 41 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2023 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ________________________________________ RYAN THODEN, Plaintiff, ANSWER TO AMENDED COMPLAINT v. Index No.: 601443/2023 HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, K&B QUALITY SERVICES INC., MAJOR LEAGUE TRANSPORTATION LLC, and R.M. PARADAZELYA, Defendants. ________________________________________ Defendants, HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP., K&B QUALITY SERVICES, INC., and R.M. PARADAZELYA, by their attorneys, HAGELIN SPENCER LLC, for their Answer to Plaintiff’s Amended Verified Complaint, herein alleges upon information and belief: FIRST: Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs 7, 8, 33, 34, 43, 44, 46, 57, 58, 59, 64, 65, 66, 78, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, and 88 of the Plaintiff’s Complaint. SECOND: Deny having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations contained in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 47, 48, 49, 50, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 60, 61, 62, 63, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, and 81 the Plaintiff’s Complaint. THIRD: Admit the allegations contained in paragraphs 36 and 51 of the Plaintiff’s Complaint. FOURTH: Deny each and every allegation of Plaintiff’s Complaint not hereinbefore specifically admitted, denied, or otherwise controverted. FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE: FIFTH: That upon information and belief, the accident, and/or injuries, and/or damages, as alleged in the Complaint, which were sustained by the Plaintiff were caused in whole or in part or were contributed to by the culpable conduct and want of care on the part of the Plaintiff's negligence, and/or Plaintiff's assumption of the risk, without any negligence or fault or want of care on the part of these answering Defendants. FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE: SIXTH: That upon information and belief, all or part of the cost of Plaintiff's medical care, loss of earnings, or other economic loss may have been paid, replaced or indemnified in 1 of 3 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2023 02:23 PM INDEX NO. 601443/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 41 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2023 whole or in part from collateral sources or with reasonable certainty, will be replaced or indemnified in the future from such collateral sources and to that extent, these Defendants request that in the event Plaintiff recovers any judgment herein, that such amounts as have been or may be recovered in whole or in part from collateral sources be determined by the court and the amounts Plaintiff recovers be reduced by said amounts. FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE: SEVENTH: That upon information and belief, the Plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury as defined in Section 5102(d) of the Insurance Law of the State of New York and has not sustained economic loss greater than basic economic loss as defined in Section 5102(a) of the Insurance Law of the State of New York. FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE: EIGHTH: That upon information and belief, the vehicle which was occupied by the Plaintiff at the time of the incident complained of in the Complaint, was equipped with seat belts and/or harnesses, the use of which would have prevented or substantially reduced the Plaintiff's injuries, but upon information and belief the Plaintiff did not make use of such a device(s). That the Plaintiff's failure to wear such safety equipment was a contributing factor to his/her/their injuries, if any. FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE: NINTH: That upon information and belief, the accident in issue may have been caused by an emergency situation created in the absence of negligence on the part of these Defendants, and they are, therefore, free of negligence as a matter of law. FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE: TENTH: That upon information and belief, the claim of the Plaintiff is frivolous as a matter of law entitling these Defendants to an award of costs and disbursements pursuant to CPLR § 8303-a. FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE: ELEVENTH: That if the vehicle being operated by the Defendant R.M. PARADAZELYA was leased by the Defendant K&B QUALITY SERVICES INC., from the Defendant HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, then, upon information and belief any cause of action against HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, is null and void pursuant to United States Code Title 49, Chapter 301, Subchapter 1, §30106. (The Graves Amendment). 2 of 3 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2023 02:23 PM INDEX NO. 601443/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 41 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2023 FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THESE DEFENDANTS HEREIN ALLEGE: TWELFTH: That if the vehicle being operated by the Defendant R.M. PARADAZELYA was owned by the Defendant K&B QUALITY SERVICES INC. and financed through Defendant HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, then, upon information and belief any cause of action against HUB TRUCK RENTAL CORP, is null and void pursuant to United States Code Title 49, Chapter 301, Subchapter 1, §30106. (The Graves Amendment). FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, AND BY WAY OF A CROSSCLAIM, THIS ANSWERING DEFENDANT HEREIN ALLEGES: TWELFTH: That if the Plaintiff sustained injuries and damages as alleged in the Complaint, by reason of fault other than his own, and judgment is recovered against these answering Defendants, then the liability of said Defendants will have been brought on by reason of the primary negligence of the Co-Defendant, MAJOR LEAGUE TRANSPORTATION LLC, without any negligence on the part of these answering Defendants, who is thereby entitled to indemnity, common law and contractual, and/or contribution from, and judgment over and against the Co-Defendant for such liability or such proportionate share that represents the amount, degree or kind of negligence attributable to the Defendants. These Defendants also claim contingent benefit upon any future compromise or settlement between the Co-Defendant and the Plaintiff pursuant to the provisions of General Obligations Law §15-108 as they may apply to any such compromise or settlement. WHEREFORE, these Defendants demand judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s Complaint, and further demands that the ultimate rights of the parties be determined, and these Defendants demand the costs and disbursements of this action. DATED: December 27, 2023 ___________________________________ Megan F. Organek, Esq. HAGELIN SPENCER LLC Attorneys for Defendants 135 Delaware Avenue, Suite 200 Buffalo, New York 14202 (716) 849-3500 TO: Jonathan Shalom, Esq. SHALOM LAW, PLLC Attorneys for Plaintiff 105-13 Metropolitan Avenue Forest Hills, New York 11375 (718) 971-9474 - COUNSEL FOR CO-DEFENDANT AS THEY MAY APPEAR - 3 of 3