Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024 01:49 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024
EXHIBIT B
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024
05/09/2023 01:49
07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16
3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024
05/09/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
-----------------------------------------------------------------X
CONNOR CREAGH,
INDEX NO.: 707576/2023
Plaintiff(s),
VERIFIED ANSWER,
- against - BILL OF PARTICULARS &
COMBINED DEMANDS
AMIT DHOOT, LYFT, INC., UBER TECHNOLOGIES,
INC., RAISER-NY, LLC AND RAISER, LLC, Our File No.: 1123673
Case ID No.: 123949
Defendant(s). Your File:
-----------------------------------------------------------------X
The Defendant(s) AMIT DHOOT by their/his/her attorneys, BAKER, MCEVOY, &
MOSKOVITS, answering the Complaint of the Plaintiff herein, respectfully shows and alleges
upon information and belief, as follows:
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as
follows: 32,34,57,59,82,84,107,109,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121.
Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows:
1,5,6,,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,33,35,36,37,38,39,
40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,,54,55,56,58,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,
73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,83,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,
103,104,105,106,108,110,112,113
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Defendant(s) repeats, reiterates, and realleges their responses to each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Answer with the same force and effect as if fully
set forth herein.
Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as
follows: 130,131.
Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows:
123,124,125,126,127,128,129.
1 of 20
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024
05/09/2023 01:49
07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16
3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024
05/09/2023
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Defendant(s) repeats, reiterates, and realleges their responses to each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Answer with the same force and effect as if fully
set forth herein.
Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as
follows: 140,141.
Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows:
133,134,135,136,137,138,139.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Defendant(s) repeats, reiterates, and realleges their responses to each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Answer with the same force and effect as if fully
set forth herein.
Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as
follows: 150,151.
Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows:
143,144,145,146,147,148,149.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Defendant(s) repeats, reiterates, and realleges their responses to each and every allegation
contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Answer with the same force and effect as if fully
set forth herein.
Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as
follows: 160,161.
Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows:
153,154,155,156,157,158,159.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Court lacks personal jurisdiction over the answering Defendant(s) in that the
summons and complaint was not served upon the Defendant(s), and if the summons was served,
it was not affected in accordance with the applicable provisions of Article 3 of the CPLR
governing the service of process.
2 of 20
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024
05/09/2023 01:49
07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16
3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024
05/09/2023
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
By reason of the provisions of Article 51 of the New York Comprehensive Motor Vehicle
Insurance Reparations Act, Sections 5101 to 5108, this Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject
matter of this action and Plaintiff(s) is/are expressly prohibited from maintaining this action.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Pursuant to the C.P.L.R. Sections 1411 and 1412, any damages sustained by the
Plaintiff(s) was/were caused by the culpable conduct of Plaintiff(s), including contributory
negligence or assumption of the risk, and not by the culpable conduct or negligence of the
answering Defendant(s).
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Pursuant to C.P.L.R. 4545, Plaintiff's recovery should be reduced by any amounts
received or that will be received by Plaintiff(s) from collateral sources of payment.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
If Plaintiff(s) suffered injury and damage in the manner and at the time and place alleged
in the Complaint, which Defendant(s) deny, and if it is determined that said injury and damage
were caused by and contributed to the Plaintiff's failure to use or properly use seat belts, shoulder
harness(es) or other restraining devices, pursuant to the authority of Spier V. Barker, 35 N.Y.2d
444, 363 N.Y.S.2d 916, Defendant(s) pleads Plaintiff’s failure to mitigate damages.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
If it is determined that Plaintiff(s) or any party to this lawsuit has proceeded to arbitration
with respect to any issue related to this action that results in an adverse ruling to said Plaintiff(s)
or party, then the answering Defendant(s) pleads said adverse ruling or award on the theory of
collateral estoppel under the authority of Matter of American Insurance Co. (Messenger-Aetna
Cas. & Sur. Co.), 43 N.Y.2d 184, 401 N.Y.S.2d 36; Altman v. Queens Tr. Corp., 94 Misc.2d
549, 405 N.Y.S.2d 212; Dermatossian v. New York City Transit Authority, 67 N.Y.2d 219, 501
N.Y.S.2d 784; c.f. Baldwin v. Brooks, 83 A.D.2d 85, 443 N.Y.S.2d 906; Clemmens v. Apple, 65
N.Y.2d 746 and Schultz v. Boyscouts of America, 65 N.Y.2d 189.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Upon information and belief, plaintiff(s) failed to mitigate damages.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff(s) damages, if any, are limited by the offset provisions of Section 15-108 of the
General Obligations Law.
3 of 20
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024
05/09/2023 01:49
07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16
3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024
05/09/2023
RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
Defendant(s) reserve(s) the right to amend the answer, defenses, and/or any
counterclaims and cross claims at a later date.
Cross-claim against: LYFT, INC., UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., RAISER-NY, LLC
AND RAISER, LLC
If Plaintiff(s) was caused to sustain any injury and damages as alleged in the complaint
through the negligence or culpable conduct other than the plaintiff(s)' own negligence or
culpable conduct, the alleged injury and damages were caused by the negligence or culpable
conduct of the co-defendant(s) of the answering defendant(s) named as parties to this action in
failing to properly operate, control and/or maintain their motor vehicle(s) at the time and place
and under the circumstances alleged in the complaint, and that the answering defendant(s)
demand indemnification and/or contribution pursuant to Dole V. Dow Chemical Corp., 30
N.Y.2d 143, 331 N.Y.S.2d 382 and Article 14 of the C.P.L.R. from said co-defendant(s) for all
or part of any verdict or judgment which the plaintiff(s) may recover against the answering
defendant(s).
WHEREFORE, Defendant(s) demand(s) judgment dismissing the Complaint or
diminishing the damages recoverable by Plaintiff(s) in proportion to the culpable conduct
attributable to Plaintiff(s), together with the costs and disbursements of this action, and further
demands that in the event answering Defendant(s) is/are found liable, that Defendant(s), on the
basis of apportionment of responsibility and/or indemnification, have judgment over against the
Co-Defendant(s) for all or part of the verdict or judgment that Plaintiff(s) may recover against
answering Defendant(s), together with the costs and disbursements of this action, and for any
expenses incurred in the defense thereof, including attorneys’ fees.
.
Dated: May 3, 2023
Brooklyn, N.Y.
BAKER, MCEVOY, & MOSKOVITS,
Ronit Z. Moskovits, Esq.
Attorney(s) for the Defendant
AMIT DHOOT
5 Broadway, Suite 3
Freeport, New York 11520
Tel: 212-857-8230
4 of 20
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024
05/09/2023 01:49
07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16
3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024
05/09/2023
NIAMEHR LAW FIRM
Attorney(s) for the Plaintiff(s)
CONNOR CREAGH
30 WALL STREET, 8TH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005
Tel: 646-224-0735
LYFT, INC.
C/O C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
co-defendant(s)
28 LIBERTY STREET
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
C/O C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
co-defendant(s)
28 LIBERTY STREET
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005
RASIER-NY, LLC
C/O C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
co-defendant(s)
28 LIBERTY STREET
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005
RASIER, LLC
C/O C T CORPORATION SYSTEM
co-defendant(s)
28 LIBERTY STREET
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005
5 of 20
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024
05/09/2023 01:49
07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16
3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024
05/09/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
-----------------------------------------------------------------X
CONNOR CREAGH, INDEX NO.: 707576/2023
Plaintiff(s), ATTORNEY VERIFICATION
- against - Our File No.: 1123673
Case ID No.: 123949
AMIT DHOOT, LYFT, INC., UBER TECHNOLOGIES, Your File:
INC., RAISER-NY, LLC AND RAISER, LLC,
Defendant(s).
-----------------------------------------------------------------X
I, RONIT Z. MOSKOVITS, an attorney admitted to the practice of law before the courts
of the State of New York, and not a party to the above-referenced action, affirm the following to
be true under the penalties of perjury:
1. Affirmant is a member of the law firm of BAKER, MCEVOY, & MOSKOVITS,
attorneys of record for answering Defendant(s) in the above-referenced action.
2. Affirmant has read the VERIFIED ANSWER, BILL OF PARTICULARS, &
COMBINED DEMANDS and knows the contents thereof; that same is true to Affirmant’s own
knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as
to those matters Affirmant believes them to be true.
3. This verification is made by Affirmant and not by answering Defendant(s),
because said Defendant(s) were not within the County in which BAKER, MCEVOY, &
MOSKOVITS, maintain their offices for the practice of law when this VERIFIED ANSWER,
BILL OF PARTICULARS, & COMBINED DEMANDS was drafted.
4. The grounds of Affirmant’s belief as to all matters not stated upon Affirmant’s
knowledge is as follows: BOOKS AND RECORDS MAINTAINED BY THE FIRM OF
BAKER, MCEVOY, & MOSKOVITS, . AND INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY AMERICAN
TRANSIT INSURANCE COMPANY.
Dated: May 3, 2023
Brooklyn, NY
6 of 20
Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024 01:49 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024 EXHIBIT B FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 01:49 07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS -----------------------------------------------------------------X CONNOR CREAGH, INDEX NO.: 707576/2023 Plaintiff(s), VERIFIED ANSWER, - against - BILL OF PARTICULARS & COMBINED DEMANDS AMIT DHOOT, LYFT, INC., UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., RAISER-NY, LLC AND RAISER, LLC, Our File No.: 1123673 Case ID No.: 123949 Defendant(s). Your File: -----------------------------------------------------------------X The Defendant(s) AMIT DHOOT by their/his/her attorneys, BAKER, MCEVOY, & MOSKOVITS, answering the Complaint of the Plaintiff herein, respectfully shows and alleges upon information and belief, as follows: FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 32,34,57,59,82,84,107,109,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121. Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 1,5,6,,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,33,35,36,37,38,39, 40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,,54,55,56,58,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72, 73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,83,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102, 103,104,105,106,108,110,112,113 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Defendant(s) repeats, reiterates, and realleges their responses to each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Answer with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein. Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 130,131. Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 123,124,125,126,127,128,129. 1 of 20 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 01:49 07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Defendant(s) repeats, reiterates, and realleges their responses to each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Answer with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein. Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 140,141. Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 133,134,135,136,137,138,139. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION Defendant(s) repeats, reiterates, and realleges their responses to each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Answer with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein. Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 150,151. Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 143,144,145,146,147,148,149. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Defendant(s) repeats, reiterates, and realleges their responses to each and every allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Answer with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein. Deny(ies) each and every allegation in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 160,161. Deny(ies) any knowledge or information thereof, sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the paragraphs of the Complaint designated as follows: 153,154,155,156,157,158,159. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Court lacks personal jurisdiction over the answering Defendant(s) in that the summons and complaint was not served upon the Defendant(s), and if the summons was served, it was not affected in accordance with the applicable provisions of Article 3 of the CPLR governing the service of process. 2 of 20 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 01:49 07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE By reason of the provisions of Article 51 of the New York Comprehensive Motor Vehicle Insurance Reparations Act, Sections 5101 to 5108, this Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and Plaintiff(s) is/are expressly prohibited from maintaining this action. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Pursuant to the C.P.L.R. Sections 1411 and 1412, any damages sustained by the Plaintiff(s) was/were caused by the culpable conduct of Plaintiff(s), including contributory negligence or assumption of the risk, and not by the culpable conduct or negligence of the answering Defendant(s). FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Pursuant to C.P.L.R. 4545, Plaintiff's recovery should be reduced by any amounts received or that will be received by Plaintiff(s) from collateral sources of payment. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE If Plaintiff(s) suffered injury and damage in the manner and at the time and place alleged in the Complaint, which Defendant(s) deny, and if it is determined that said injury and damage were caused by and contributed to the Plaintiff's failure to use or properly use seat belts, shoulder harness(es) or other restraining devices, pursuant to the authority of Spier V. Barker, 35 N.Y.2d 444, 363 N.Y.S.2d 916, Defendant(s) pleads Plaintiff’s failure to mitigate damages. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE If it is determined that Plaintiff(s) or any party to this lawsuit has proceeded to arbitration with respect to any issue related to this action that results in an adverse ruling to said Plaintiff(s) or party, then the answering Defendant(s) pleads said adverse ruling or award on the theory of collateral estoppel under the authority of Matter of American Insurance Co. (Messenger-Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co.), 43 N.Y.2d 184, 401 N.Y.S.2d 36; Altman v. Queens Tr. Corp., 94 Misc.2d 549, 405 N.Y.S.2d 212; Dermatossian v. New York City Transit Authority, 67 N.Y.2d 219, 501 N.Y.S.2d 784; c.f. Baldwin v. Brooks, 83 A.D.2d 85, 443 N.Y.S.2d 906; Clemmens v. Apple, 65 N.Y.2d 746 and Schultz v. Boyscouts of America, 65 N.Y.2d 189. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Upon information and belief, plaintiff(s) failed to mitigate damages. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff(s) damages, if any, are limited by the offset provisions of Section 15-108 of the General Obligations Law. 3 of 20 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 01:49 07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 RESERVATION OF RIGHTS Defendant(s) reserve(s) the right to amend the answer, defenses, and/or any counterclaims and cross claims at a later date. Cross-claim against: LYFT, INC., UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., RAISER-NY, LLC AND RAISER, LLC If Plaintiff(s) was caused to sustain any injury and damages as alleged in the complaint through the negligence or culpable conduct other than the plaintiff(s)' own negligence or culpable conduct, the alleged injury and damages were caused by the negligence or culpable conduct of the co-defendant(s) of the answering defendant(s) named as parties to this action in failing to properly operate, control and/or maintain their motor vehicle(s) at the time and place and under the circumstances alleged in the complaint, and that the answering defendant(s) demand indemnification and/or contribution pursuant to Dole V. Dow Chemical Corp., 30 N.Y.2d 143, 331 N.Y.S.2d 382 and Article 14 of the C.P.L.R. from said co-defendant(s) for all or part of any verdict or judgment which the plaintiff(s) may recover against the answering defendant(s). WHEREFORE, Defendant(s) demand(s) judgment dismissing the Complaint or diminishing the damages recoverable by Plaintiff(s) in proportion to the culpable conduct attributable to Plaintiff(s), together with the costs and disbursements of this action, and further demands that in the event answering Defendant(s) is/are found liable, that Defendant(s), on the basis of apportionment of responsibility and/or indemnification, have judgment over against the Co-Defendant(s) for all or part of the verdict or judgment that Plaintiff(s) may recover against answering Defendant(s), together with the costs and disbursements of this action, and for any expenses incurred in the defense thereof, including attorneys’ fees. . Dated: May 3, 2023 Brooklyn, N.Y. BAKER, MCEVOY, & MOSKOVITS, Ronit Z. Moskovits, Esq. Attorney(s) for the Defendant AMIT DHOOT 5 Broadway, Suite 3 Freeport, New York 11520 Tel: 212-857-8230 4 of 20 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 01:49 07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 NIAMEHR LAW FIRM Attorney(s) for the Plaintiff(s) CONNOR CREAGH 30 WALL STREET, 8TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005 Tel: 646-224-0735 LYFT, INC. C/O C T CORPORATION SYSTEM co-defendant(s) 28 LIBERTY STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005 UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. C/O C T CORPORATION SYSTEM co-defendant(s) 28 LIBERTY STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005 RASIER-NY, LLC C/O C T CORPORATION SYSTEM co-defendant(s) 28 LIBERTY STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005 RASIER, LLC C/O C T CORPORATION SYSTEM co-defendant(s) 28 LIBERTY STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005 5 of 20 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 01:49 07:25 PM INDEX NO. 707576/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 16 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024 05/09/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS -----------------------------------------------------------------X CONNOR CREAGH, INDEX NO.: 707576/2023 Plaintiff(s), ATTORNEY VERIFICATION - against - Our File No.: 1123673 Case ID No.: 123949 AMIT DHOOT, LYFT, INC., UBER TECHNOLOGIES, Your File: INC., RAISER-NY, LLC AND RAISER, LLC, Defendant(s). -----------------------------------------------------------------X I, RONIT Z. MOSKOVITS, an attorney admitted to the practice of law before the courts of the State of New York, and not a party to the above-referenced action, affirm the following to be true under the penalties of perjury: 1. Affirmant is a member of the law firm of BAKER, MCEVOY, & MOSKOVITS, attorneys of record for answering Defendant(s) in the above-referenced action. 2. Affirmant has read the VERIFIED ANSWER, BILL OF PARTICULARS, & COMBINED DEMANDS and knows the contents thereof; that same is true to Affirmant’s own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters Affirmant believes them to be true. 3. This verification is made by Affirmant and not by answering Defendant(s), because said Defendant(s) were not within the County in which BAKER, MCEVOY, & MOSKOVITS, maintain their offices for the practice of law when this VERIFIED ANSWER, BILL OF PARTICULARS, & COMBINED DEMANDS was drafted. 4. The grounds of Affirmant’s belief as to all matters not stated upon Affirmant’s knowledge is as follows: BOOKS AND RECORDS MAINTAINED BY THE FIRM OF BAKER, MCEVOY, & MOSKOVITS, . AND INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY AMERICAN TRANSIT INSURANCE COMPANY. Dated: May 3, 2023 Brooklyn, NY 6 of 20