Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
X
JOSEPH ITARA ANd TABETHA ITARA, Index No. 15294812020
Plaintiffss, VERIFIED ANSWER
-against -
MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a
MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT,
Defendant.
X
Defendant, MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION ilslWa MASARYK TOWERS
CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT (hereinafter "MASARYK"), by
its attorneys Milber Makris Plousadis & Seiden, LLP, as and for its Verified Answer to Verified
Complaint dated March 19,2020, allege upon information and belief as follows:
AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
ON BEHALF OF S.IOSEPH ITARA
1. Admits each and every allegation set forth in paragraph
(I') of the Verified
Complaint.
o'2" and"3"
2. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs of the Verified
Complaint.
44)' of
3. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph the Verified
Complaint, except admits that, on August 13,2019, Defendant MASARYK had a place of business
located at 65 Columbia Street, New York, New York 10002.
4. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph 6c5" of the Verified
Complaint, except admits that, on August L3,2019, Defendant MASARYK had a place of business
located at77 Columbia Street, New York, New York 10002.
1 of 9
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
5. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph *6" of the Verified
Complaint, except admits that, on August 13,2019, Defendant MASARYK was the owner of the
premises located 65 Columbia Street, New York, New York 10002.
c(7)'
6. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph of the Verified
Complaint, except admits that the premises located 65 Columbia Street, New York, New York
10002 is a co-op apartment building.
('8" of
7. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph the Verified
Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court.
8. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations contained in paragraph "9" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all
questions of law to this Honorable Court.
9. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs "10" and "l1" of the
Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court.
10. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations contained in paragraph "I2" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all
questions of law to this Honorable Court.
11. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs "l3" ard"l4" of the
Verified Complaint.
12. Denies each and every allegation contained inparagtaphs'015," "16," "17," "18,"
and'019" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable
Court.
2
2 of 9
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
13. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations contained in parugraph "20" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all
questions of law to this Honorable Court.
14. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph'02I" of the Verified
Complaint.
AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFFS TABETHA ITARA
15. With respect to the allegations contained in paragraph "22" of the Verified
Complaint, the answering Defendant repeats and realleges each and every denial contained in
paragraphs "1" through "2l" thereof, as if fully set forth at length herein.
16. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations contained in paragraph "23" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all
questions of law to this Honorable Court.
u24"
17. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph of the Verified
Complaint.
AS AND F'OR A FIRST TIVE DEFENSE
18. If the plaintiffs have sustained any damages as alleged, which damages are
expressly denied, then all such damages will have been caused or brought about in whole or in part
by the afhrmative wrongdoing, fault, negligence and failure of due care (hereinafter "culpable
conduct") of the plaintiffs and any recovery should be thereby diminished in the proportion which
the plaintiffs' culpable conduct bears to the conduct which caused the alleged damages, pursuant
to CPLRRuIe 1411.
3
3 of 9
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
19. Upon information and belief, any past or future costs or expenses incurred or to be
incurred by the plaintiffs for medical care, dental care, custodial care, or rehabilitative service, loss
of earnings or other economic loss has been, or will, with reasonable certainty be replaced or
indemnified in whole or in part from a collateral source, as defined in Section 4545 of the New
York Civil Practice Laws & Rules. If any damages are recoverable against the undersigned
Defendant, the amount of such damages shall be diminished by the amount of the funds which the
plaintiffs have received or shall receive from such collateral sources.
AS AND FOR A THIRI) TIVE DEFENSE
20. If itshould be found after trial that the Defendant is liable to the plaintiffs in the
amount of 50o/o or less of the total liability assigned to all persons liable, the liability of Defendant
to the plaintiffs for non-economic loss shall not exceed the Defendant's equitable share determined
in accordance with the relative culpability of each person causing or contributing to the total
liability for non-economic loss in accordance with Article 16 of the CPLR.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
21. The injuries and damages allegedly sustained by plaintiffs were not caused by any
negligence, carelessness, culpable conduct or breach of duty on the part of the Defendant, its
servants, agents or employees, but were caused by reason of the carelessness, negligence culpable
conduct and/or breach of duty of some third parlies, their servants, agents or employees over whom
the Defendant had no control.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH AF'FIRMATIVE DEFENSE
22. The Defendant had no prior notice of the alleged dangerous condition, either actual
or constructive.
4
4 of 9
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
23 The Defendant did not cause or create any alleged dangerous condition.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AF'F'IRMATIVE DEFENSE
24. The action is barred by plaintiffs' implied assumption of the risk for the activity
plaintiffs was doing at the time of the occurrsnce in that said risks and danger were open, obvious
and apparent and known to the plaintiffs.
AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AF'F'IRMATIVE DEFENSE
25. That the Complaint fails to state a cause of action.
AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
26. The liability of the Defendant, ifany, to the plaintiffs for non-economic loss is
limited to their equitable share, determined in accordance with the relative culpability of all
persons or entities contributing to the total liability for non-economic loss, including named parties
and others over whom plaintiffs could have obtained personal jurisdiction with due diligence.
AS AND FOR A TENTH F'F'IRM A TIVE DE,X'ENSE
27 . The action is barred by plaintiffs' express assumption of the risk for the activity
plaintiffs was doing at the time of the occunence.
AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
28. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate their damages pursuant to Law, Statute and Agreement
and therefore, have sustained no damages.
AS AND FOR A TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
29. All claims raised and causes of action asserted in the Verified Complaint against
the Answering Defendants are barred by laches ot waiver, and plaintiffs is equitably estopped from
asserting such claims or causes of action against the Defendants.
5
5 of 9
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
AS AND F'OR A THIRTEE AF'F'IRMATIVE DEF'ENSE
30. Plaintiffs have failed to join and include in this action all identifiable and
indispensable parties without whorn, in equity and fairness, this action should not proceed.
AS AND FOR A FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
31. The Defendant alleges that plaintiffs' alleged injuries and damages were solely
and proximately caused by the intervening negligence, carelessness, gross negligence, willfulness,
wantonness, recklessness, and/or intentional conduct of an independent third party.
AS AND FOR F'IF'TEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DE F'ENSE
32. If Plaintiffs sustained any injury or incurred any loss or damages as alleged in the
Verified Complaint, the same were caused in whole or in part by actions or omissions of another
or others over whom the Defendant is not responsible, and whose conduct the Defendant had no
duty or reason to anticipate or control.
AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
33. The Defendant alleges that plaintiffs' injuries, if any, were proximately caused by
an unforeseeable, unanticipated, independent, intervening andlor superseding event beyond the
control, and unrelated to any conduct of the Defendant.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
34, The Defendant alleges that, to the extent that plaintiffs' injuries were caused
directly, solely, and proximately by allergies, sensitivities, medical conditions and idiosyncracies
peculiar to plaintiffs and not found in the general public, they are unknown, unknowable or not
reasonably foreseeable to Defendant.
6
6 of 9
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
WHEREFORE, the Defendant, MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION ilslWa
MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT, dEMANdS
judgment:
(A) Dismissing the Verified Complaint in its entirety;
(B) Awarding MASARYK the costs and disbursements of this action; and
(C) Awarding MASARYK such other and further relief as this Court may deem
just and proper.
Dated: Woodbury, New York
August 7,2020
MILBER MAKRIS PLOUSADIS
& SEIDEN, LLP
Susan J
MILBER SPL IS
& SEID , LLP
Attomeys for Defendant
MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION
ilslWa MASARYK TOWERS
CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS
MANAGEMENT,
1000 Woodbury Road, Suite 402
Woodbury, New York 11797
(s16) 712-4000
File No.: 667-19159
TO Brett J. Nomberg, Esq.
BRAND BRAND NOMBERG &
ROSENBAUM, LLP
Attorney for Plaintiffss
JOSEPH ITARA ANd TABETHA ITARA
622 3RD Avenue, 7rH Floor
New York, New York 10017
(212) 808-0448
7
7 of 9
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
ATTORNEY VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.:
COLINTY OF NASSAU )
SUSAN J. STROMBERG, being duly sworn, deposes and says that she is a Partner with
the law firm of MILBER MAKRIS PLOUSADIS & SEIDEN, LLP, counsel for Defendant,
MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION ilslh/a MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a
MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT, in the within action, and makes this verification
pursuant to CPLR 3020(d)(3). Defendant is not within the county where deponent has her office.
Deponent has read the foregoing VERIFIED ANSWER and knows the contents thereof; that the
same is true on the basis of information and belief, based upon books and records in the possession
of deponent and conversations with Defendant.
Dated: Woodbury, New York
August 7,2020
SUSAN J.
8
8 of 9
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020
SUPREME COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
COLINTY OF NEW YORK
X
JOSEPH ITARA ANd TABETHA ITARA, Index No. 15294812020
Plaintiffs,
-against -
MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a
MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT,
Defendant.
VERIFIED ANSI'I/ER
MILBER MAKRIS PLOUSADIS & SEIDEN, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Attorneys for Defendant, MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION i/s/h/a
MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT
Of/ice and Post Office Address, Telephone
1000 Woodbury Road, Suite 402
Woodbury, NY I1797
(s16) 712-4000
MMPS File No.: 532-19159
To Signatule (Rule 130-1. 1-a)
Print name beneath
Attorney(s)for
Service within
of a copy of the is hereby admitted.
Dated,
Attorney(s) for
Please take notice
N NOTICE OF ENTRY
true copy of a
that the within is a (certiJieQ
duly entered in the office of the clerk of the within named coud on
I NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT
that anorder of which the within is a true copy will be presented for settlement
to the
HON. one of the judges of the within named court, at
Dated, Yours, etc.
MILBER MAKRIS PLOUSADIS & SEIDEN, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
At t orneys
for Defe ndant
To 1000 Woodbury Road, Suite 402
Woodbury, New York 11797
9 of 9
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X JOSEPH ITARA ANd TABETHA ITARA, Index No. 15294812020 Plaintiffss, VERIFIED ANSWER -against - MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT, Defendant. X Defendant, MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION ilslWa MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT (hereinafter "MASARYK"), by its attorneys Milber Makris Plousadis & Seiden, LLP, as and for its Verified Answer to Verified Complaint dated March 19,2020, allege upon information and belief as follows: AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF S.IOSEPH ITARA 1. Admits each and every allegation set forth in paragraph (I') of the Verified Complaint. o'2" and"3" 2. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs of the Verified Complaint. 44)' of 3. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph the Verified Complaint, except admits that, on August 13,2019, Defendant MASARYK had a place of business located at 65 Columbia Street, New York, New York 10002. 4. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph 6c5" of the Verified Complaint, except admits that, on August L3,2019, Defendant MASARYK had a place of business located at77 Columbia Street, New York, New York 10002. 1 of 9 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 5. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph *6" of the Verified Complaint, except admits that, on August 13,2019, Defendant MASARYK was the owner of the premises located 65 Columbia Street, New York, New York 10002. c(7)' 6. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph of the Verified Complaint, except admits that the premises located 65 Columbia Street, New York, New York 10002 is a co-op apartment building. ('8" of 7. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court. 8. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph "9" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court. 9. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs "10" and "l1" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court. 10. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph "I2" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court. 11. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs "l3" ard"l4" of the Verified Complaint. 12. Denies each and every allegation contained inparagtaphs'015," "16," "17," "18," and'019" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court. 2 2 of 9 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 13. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in parugraph "20" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court. 14. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph'02I" of the Verified Complaint. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFFS TABETHA ITARA 15. With respect to the allegations contained in paragraph "22" of the Verified Complaint, the answering Defendant repeats and realleges each and every denial contained in paragraphs "1" through "2l" thereof, as if fully set forth at length herein. 16. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph "23" of the Verified Complaint, and respectfully refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court. u24" 17. Denies each and every allegation set forth in paragraph of the Verified Complaint. AS AND F'OR A FIRST TIVE DEFENSE 18. If the plaintiffs have sustained any damages as alleged, which damages are expressly denied, then all such damages will have been caused or brought about in whole or in part by the afhrmative wrongdoing, fault, negligence and failure of due care (hereinafter "culpable conduct") of the plaintiffs and any recovery should be thereby diminished in the proportion which the plaintiffs' culpable conduct bears to the conduct which caused the alleged damages, pursuant to CPLRRuIe 1411. 3 3 of 9 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 19. Upon information and belief, any past or future costs or expenses incurred or to be incurred by the plaintiffs for medical care, dental care, custodial care, or rehabilitative service, loss of earnings or other economic loss has been, or will, with reasonable certainty be replaced or indemnified in whole or in part from a collateral source, as defined in Section 4545 of the New York Civil Practice Laws & Rules. If any damages are recoverable against the undersigned Defendant, the amount of such damages shall be diminished by the amount of the funds which the plaintiffs have received or shall receive from such collateral sources. AS AND FOR A THIRI) TIVE DEFENSE 20. If itshould be found after trial that the Defendant is liable to the plaintiffs in the amount of 50o/o or less of the total liability assigned to all persons liable, the liability of Defendant to the plaintiffs for non-economic loss shall not exceed the Defendant's equitable share determined in accordance with the relative culpability of each person causing or contributing to the total liability for non-economic loss in accordance with Article 16 of the CPLR. AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21. The injuries and damages allegedly sustained by plaintiffs were not caused by any negligence, carelessness, culpable conduct or breach of duty on the part of the Defendant, its servants, agents or employees, but were caused by reason of the carelessness, negligence culpable conduct and/or breach of duty of some third parlies, their servants, agents or employees over whom the Defendant had no control. AS AND FOR A FIFTH AF'FIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22. The Defendant had no prior notice of the alleged dangerous condition, either actual or constructive. 4 4 of 9 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 The Defendant did not cause or create any alleged dangerous condition. AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AF'F'IRMATIVE DEFENSE 24. The action is barred by plaintiffs' implied assumption of the risk for the activity plaintiffs was doing at the time of the occurrsnce in that said risks and danger were open, obvious and apparent and known to the plaintiffs. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AF'F'IRMATIVE DEFENSE 25. That the Complaint fails to state a cause of action. AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 26. The liability of the Defendant, ifany, to the plaintiffs for non-economic loss is limited to their equitable share, determined in accordance with the relative culpability of all persons or entities contributing to the total liability for non-economic loss, including named parties and others over whom plaintiffs could have obtained personal jurisdiction with due diligence. AS AND FOR A TENTH F'F'IRM A TIVE DE,X'ENSE 27 . The action is barred by plaintiffs' express assumption of the risk for the activity plaintiffs was doing at the time of the occunence. AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 28. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate their damages pursuant to Law, Statute and Agreement and therefore, have sustained no damages. AS AND FOR A TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 29. All claims raised and causes of action asserted in the Verified Complaint against the Answering Defendants are barred by laches ot waiver, and plaintiffs is equitably estopped from asserting such claims or causes of action against the Defendants. 5 5 of 9 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 AS AND F'OR A THIRTEE AF'F'IRMATIVE DEF'ENSE 30. Plaintiffs have failed to join and include in this action all identifiable and indispensable parties without whorn, in equity and fairness, this action should not proceed. AS AND FOR A FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 31. The Defendant alleges that plaintiffs' alleged injuries and damages were solely and proximately caused by the intervening negligence, carelessness, gross negligence, willfulness, wantonness, recklessness, and/or intentional conduct of an independent third party. AS AND FOR F'IF'TEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DE F'ENSE 32. If Plaintiffs sustained any injury or incurred any loss or damages as alleged in the Verified Complaint, the same were caused in whole or in part by actions or omissions of another or others over whom the Defendant is not responsible, and whose conduct the Defendant had no duty or reason to anticipate or control. AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 33. The Defendant alleges that plaintiffs' injuries, if any, were proximately caused by an unforeseeable, unanticipated, independent, intervening andlor superseding event beyond the control, and unrelated to any conduct of the Defendant. AS AND FOR A SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 34, The Defendant alleges that, to the extent that plaintiffs' injuries were caused directly, solely, and proximately by allergies, sensitivities, medical conditions and idiosyncracies peculiar to plaintiffs and not found in the general public, they are unknown, unknowable or not reasonably foreseeable to Defendant. 6 6 of 9 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 WHEREFORE, the Defendant, MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION ilslWa MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT, dEMANdS judgment: (A) Dismissing the Verified Complaint in its entirety; (B) Awarding MASARYK the costs and disbursements of this action; and (C) Awarding MASARYK such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. Dated: Woodbury, New York August 7,2020 MILBER MAKRIS PLOUSADIS & SEIDEN, LLP Susan J MILBER SPL IS & SEID , LLP Attomeys for Defendant MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION ilslWa MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT, 1000 Woodbury Road, Suite 402 Woodbury, New York 11797 (s16) 712-4000 File No.: 667-19159 TO Brett J. Nomberg, Esq. BRAND BRAND NOMBERG & ROSENBAUM, LLP Attorney for Plaintiffss JOSEPH ITARA ANd TABETHA ITARA 622 3RD Avenue, 7rH Floor New York, New York 10017 (212) 808-0448 7 7 of 9 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 ATTORNEY VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss.: COLINTY OF NASSAU ) SUSAN J. STROMBERG, being duly sworn, deposes and says that she is a Partner with the law firm of MILBER MAKRIS PLOUSADIS & SEIDEN, LLP, counsel for Defendant, MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION ilslh/a MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT, in the within action, and makes this verification pursuant to CPLR 3020(d)(3). Defendant is not within the county where deponent has her office. Deponent has read the foregoing VERIFIED ANSWER and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true on the basis of information and belief, based upon books and records in the possession of deponent and conversations with Defendant. Dated: Woodbury, New York August 7,2020 SUSAN J. 8 8 of 9 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/07/2020 11:51 AM INDEX NO. 152948/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/07/2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK COLINTY OF NEW YORK X JOSEPH ITARA ANd TABETHA ITARA, Index No. 15294812020 Plaintiffs, -against - MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT, Defendant. VERIFIED ANSI'I/ER MILBER MAKRIS PLOUSADIS & SEIDEN, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW Attorneys for Defendant, MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION i/s/h/a MASARYK TOWERS CORPORATION d/b/a MASARYK TOWERS MANAGEMENT Of/ice and Post Office Address, Telephone 1000 Woodbury Road, Suite 402 Woodbury, NY I1797 (s16) 712-4000 MMPS File No.: 532-19159 To Signatule (Rule 130-1. 1-a) Print name beneath Attorney(s)for Service within of a copy of the is hereby admitted. Dated, Attorney(s) for Please take notice N NOTICE OF ENTRY true copy of a that the within is a (certiJieQ duly entered in the office of the clerk of the within named coud on I NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT that anorder of which the within is a true copy will be presented for settlement to the HON. one of the judges of the within named court, at Dated, Yours, etc. MILBER MAKRIS PLOUSADIS & SEIDEN, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW At t orneys for Defe ndant To 1000 Woodbury Road, Suite 402 Woodbury, New York 11797 9 of 9