arrow left
arrow right
  • Sandra Perez v. 19 Kenmare Realty, Llc,, Little Charlie'S Oyster Bar, Inc., Citi-Urban Management Corp., 19 Kenmare Street Partners Llc, Travertine D/B/A Ken & Cook, Little Charlie'S Clam Bar Inc., The Butcher'S Daughter, Llc Tort document preview
  • Sandra Perez v. 19 Kenmare Realty, Llc,, Little Charlie'S Oyster Bar, Inc., Citi-Urban Management Corp., 19 Kenmare Street Partners Llc, Travertine D/B/A Ken & Cook, Little Charlie'S Clam Bar Inc., The Butcher'S Daughter, Llc Tort document preview
  • Sandra Perez v. 19 Kenmare Realty, Llc,, Little Charlie'S Oyster Bar, Inc., Citi-Urban Management Corp., 19 Kenmare Street Partners Llc, Travertine D/B/A Ken & Cook, Little Charlie'S Clam Bar Inc., The Butcher'S Daughter, Llc Tort document preview
  • Sandra Perez v. 19 Kenmare Realty, Llc,, Little Charlie'S Oyster Bar, Inc., Citi-Urban Management Corp., 19 Kenmare Street Partners Llc, Travertine D/B/A Ken & Cook, Little Charlie'S Clam Bar Inc., The Butcher'S Daughter, Llc Tort document preview
						
                                

Preview

YORK OUN ai 04 UU B NYSCEF BOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF 01/11/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK — NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: GEORGE J. SILVER PART 10 Justice SANDRA PEREZ MOTION INDEX NO. 150891/2014 PLAINTIFF MOTION DATE =Ve MOTION SEQ. NO. 003, 004 MOTION CAL. NO. 19 KENMARE REALTY, LLC, LITTLE CHARLIE’S OYSTER BAR, INC., CITI-URBAN MANAGEMENT CORP., 19 KENMARE STREET PARTNERS, LLC, TRAVERTINE d/b/a KEN & COOK, LITTLE CHARLIE’S CLAM BAR, INC., and THE BUTCHER’S DAUGHTER, LLC DEFENDANTS GEORGE J. SILVER, J.S.C.: Plaintiff Sandra Perez (“plaintiff”) moves, pursuant to CPLR § 3215, for a default judgment against defendant Travertine d/b/a Ken & Cook (“defendant”). Defendant has failed to answer or appear in this matter, and does not oppose the Wg Oui instant motion. eo Plaintiff alleges that she operated a coat check service at the restaurant and 50 22 lounge, “Little Charlie’s Lounge” located at 19 Kenmare Street, New York, New York. os On March 3, 2015, following completion of her work, plaintiff states that she planned FO a- to exit through the restaurant’s basement. While doing so, she alleges that she and wa vO fell on an uneven surface covered in grease, thereby sustaining a left ankle tuWu trimalleolar fracture requiring open reduction and internal fixation. ur we The action against defendant Travertine was commenced by filing a Supplemental Summons and Amended Verified Complaint on November 11, 2015. >~oOo Plaintiff avers that “On November 25, 2015, defendant Travertine was properly ou erved with the Supplemental Summons and Amended Verified Complaint.” To date, defendant Travertine has neither answered nor appeared in this action. Plaintiff contends that she sent a good faith letter to defendant Travertine on February 3, 2017 explaining its failure to answer and including a Supplemental Summons, Amended Complaint, and Affidavit of Service. Defendant Travertine did not respond. Conversely, defendants 19 Kenmore Street Partners, LLC, s/h/a 19 Kenmare Realty LLC, City-Urban Management Corp, and 19 Kenmare Street Partners LLC, have served their answers to the Amended Complaint. Plaintiff has annexed to her moving papers an affidavit of service that was submitted to the office of the Secretary of State of New York with respect to defendant Travertine. Plaintiff has also annexed the good faith letter sent to defendant Travertine as well as the Supplemental Summons and Amended Verified Complaint as evidence of the facts giving rise to this action as against defendant Travertine (a transcript of plaintiff's deposition and plaintiff's Bill of Particulars are 1 of 2 YORK QU Bi 04 Biv ND NO 014 YU NYSCEF BOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/11/2018 similarly annexed to the moving papers). Plaintiff further annexes a copy ,of the store lease that names defendant as a lessee of the property wherein plaintiff's accident occurred. Plaintiff's motion is granted. Defendant has failed to answer, and its time to appear, move, or otherwise plead has expired. Moreover, defendant has not opposed this motion, and the validity of plaintiff's lawsuit is underscored by the aforementioned items annexed to her moving papers. Notably, the process server’s constitutes prima facie evidence of proper service (see Wachovia Bank, N.A. v. Carcano, 106 AD3d 726 [2d Dept. 2013]). By failing to answer, defendant has not rebutted the presumption of proper service (see Anderson v. GHI Auto. Serv. Inc., 45 AD3d 512 [2d Dept. 2007)). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for a default judgment as to defendant Travertine is granted; and it is further ORDERED that an assessment of damages against defendant Travertine is directed, and it is further ORDERED that a copy of this order with notice of entry be served by the movant upon the Clerk of the Trial Support Office (Room 158), who is directed, upon the filing of a note of issue and a statement of readiness and the payment of proper fees, if any, to place this action on the appropriate calendar for the assessment of damages directed. Dated:_ January 10, 2018 AA COG¢I * ihe woee “3aah HON. GEORGE J. SILVER Check one: [|] FINAL DISPOSITION W/NON-FINAL DISPOSITION Check if appropriate: CJ DO NOT POST (J REFERENCE 2 of 2