Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
_____........__..________.. ------------¬______..____.._____......................----X
METROPOLITAN PROPERTY and CASUALTY Index No,
INSURANCE COMPANY as subrogee of 154107/2020
S R ROZBRUCH and YONINA JACOBS
Plaintiff,
VERIFIED
ANSWER
-against-
STEPHEN PAGOT and MNYC REAL ESTATE
HOLDINGS LLC,
Defendant.
__________..-- ______ -------------x
Defendant, MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC (hereinafter "Defendant") by its
attorneys, ROBERT A. PEIRCE & ASSOCIATES, answeriiig the Verified Coiiiplaint states as
follows:
AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
1. In answer to Paragraph 1 of the Plaintiff s Complaint, Defendant states that Paragrâph
1 contains no allegations as to itand, therefore, no response is required. To the extent
a response is required, Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge and information to form
a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained therein, and therefore denies same.
2. In answer to Paragraph 2 of the Plaintiff's Complailit, Defendant states that Paragraph
2 contains no allegations as to it and, therefore, no response is required. To the extent
a respelise is required, Defendant lacks sufficient kilowledge and information to form
a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained therein, and therefore denies same.
3. In answer to Paragraph 3 of the Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant lacks sufficient
kilowledge and information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained
1
1 of 7
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020
therein, and therefore denies same.
4. In answer to Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff's Complaint3 Defendant denies each and every
allegation therein.
5. In answer to Paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every
allegation therein.
6. In ailswer to Paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every
allegation therein.
7. In answer to Paragraph 7 of the Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant lacks sufficient
knowledge and information to form a belief as to the truth of the alhgMiam coritailled
therein, and therefore denies same.
8. In answer to Paragraph 8 of the Plaintiff's Complaiiit, Defendant lacks sufficient
knowledge and information to fonn a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained
therein, and therefore denies same.
9. In answer to Paragraph 9 of the Plaintiff's Complaiñt, Defendant lacks sufficient
knowledge and information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegaticils ccñtãilled
therein, and therefore denies same.
10. In answer to Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every
allegation therein.
11. In answer to Paragraph 11 ofPlaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every
allegation therein.
12. In answer to Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every
allegation therein.
13. In answer to Paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every
2
2 of 7
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020
allegation therein.
AS AND FOR A FIRST SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Any dainage, injury or loss of any nature allegedly sustaiñcd by Plaintiff was caused
solely and exclusively, or in the alternative, partially by the negligence, carelessness,
recklessness or otherwise improper or wrongful conduct or assumption of the risk, of
Plaintiff or his/her agents or employees, of the owner of the apartiñêilt unit, or the
subrogar, and was not caused by reason of, or in the alteiiiative, was not caused by the
sole reason of wrongful or improper conduct of the third-
any negligent, answering
party defendant.
AS AND FOR A SECOND SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That in the event that Plaintiff has or should in the future, settle any portion of the claims
arising from the allegations contained in Plaintiff's coimpiãint with any currently named or
stillto be named defendant(s), the respective rights of the reimaining parties should be
deteriñiñêd pursuant to the General Obligations Law Section 15-108.
AS AND FOR A THIRD SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrines of waiver, estoppel, and laches.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
3
3 of 7
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020
Plaintiff and/or subrogar has failed to mitigate their damages.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff has failed to join necessâry and material parties to this action, warranting the
actions dismissal.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff's claims are barred by other terms, conditions, limits, exclusion and limitations
in the Admiral Indemnity Policy.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Any damages or injuries suffered by Plaintiff was not caused by a negligent act or
nmission of answering Defendant or any individual acting under their direction or
control.
AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff received reniüileration and/or compensation for
some or all of his claimed economic loss and that the defendants are entitled to have
Plaintiff's award, if any, reduced by the amount of that remuneration and/or
compensation, pursuant to Section 4545 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules.
AS AND FOR NINETH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
4
4 of 7
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020
AS AND FOR A TENTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Defendant, his agents servants and/or employees did not take part in or
answering
direct any of the acts complained of which resulted in Plaintiff's alleged dañiages.
AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Plaintiff's deniages, ifany, were caused in whole or in party by a person or persoils
who are not within the control of the answering defeiidant.
AS AND FOR A TWELFTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
If Plaintiff sustained darsages and/or injuries as alleged in the Verified Coinplaint,
which is denied, there was an intervening, superseding cause or causes leading to this
alleged damage, and therefore, any action/inaction on the part of the answering
Defendant was not the proximate cause and/or competent producing cause of the
alleged damages and/or injuries.
AS AND FOR A CROSS CLAIM AGAINST
CO-DEFENDANT STEPHEN PAGOT
That if answering Defeñdant MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC is held liable
to the Plaintiff, such liability arose solely and exclusively, or in the alternative, was caused
the deliberate or errors or omissions of the above-
partially by acts, segligence, carelessness,
refereliced co-Defendant, and answering Defendant herein is entitled to be indemnified and/or
receive contributions from the above referé1iced co-defendant for the amount of any verdict or
judgment which may be recovered by the Plaintiff,ngainst the answering Defendant herein.
5
5 of 7
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020
WHEREFORE, Defendant MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC demands
judgment against METROPOLITAN PROPERTY and CASUALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY as subrogee of S R ROZBRUCH and YONINA JACOBS, dismissing the
complaint together with all costs and disbursements of this action.
Dated: White Plains, New York
September 3, 2020
ROBERT A. PEIRCE #c ASSO IAfÈS
By: Richard A Salvato
Attorneys for Defendant
MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC
8 Cottage Place
White Plains, New York 10601
Tel: (914) 946-8200
TO:
LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN I.HILSENRATH
Attorneys for Plaintiff
65 Roosevelt Avenue
Suite 103A
Valley Street, New York 11581
Tel: (516) 341-7232
6
6 of 7
.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020
VERIFICATION BY ATTORNEY
RICHARD A. SALVATO an attorney at law, duly admitted to practice in the Courts
of the State of New York, affirms that he has read the foregoing VERIFIED ANSWER, and
that the same is true to the best of his knowledge, which is based on investigation,
information, and belief. This Verification is not made by the ailswering defendant as he is
not within the same where his nisintaim an office or defendant
currently county attorney
includes a governmental subdivision and this verification is made by a person acquaùited
with the facts of this action.
Dated: White Plains, New York
September 3, 2020
kichard . Salvato
7
7 of 7
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK _____........__..________.. ------------¬______..____.._____......................----X METROPOLITAN PROPERTY and CASUALTY Index No, INSURANCE COMPANY as subrogee of 154107/2020 S R ROZBRUCH and YONINA JACOBS Plaintiff, VERIFIED ANSWER -against- STEPHEN PAGOT and MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC, Defendant. __________..-- ______ -------------x Defendant, MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC (hereinafter "Defendant") by its attorneys, ROBERT A. PEIRCE & ASSOCIATES, answeriiig the Verified Coiiiplaint states as follows: AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 1. In answer to Paragraph 1 of the Plaintiff s Complaint, Defendant states that Paragrâph 1 contains no allegations as to itand, therefore, no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge and information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained therein, and therefore denies same. 2. In answer to Paragraph 2 of the Plaintiff's Complailit, Defendant states that Paragraph 2 contains no allegations as to it and, therefore, no response is required. To the extent a respelise is required, Defendant lacks sufficient kilowledge and information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained therein, and therefore denies same. 3. In answer to Paragraph 3 of the Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant lacks sufficient kilowledge and information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained 1 1 of 7 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020 therein, and therefore denies same. 4. In answer to Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff's Complaint3 Defendant denies each and every allegation therein. 5. In answer to Paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation therein. 6. In ailswer to Paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation therein. 7. In answer to Paragraph 7 of the Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge and information to form a belief as to the truth of the alhgMiam coritailled therein, and therefore denies same. 8. In answer to Paragraph 8 of the Plaintiff's Complaiiit, Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge and information to fonn a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained therein, and therefore denies same. 9. In answer to Paragraph 9 of the Plaintiff's Complaiñt, Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge and information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegaticils ccñtãilled therein, and therefore denies same. 10. In answer to Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation therein. 11. In answer to Paragraph 11 ofPlaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation therein. 12. In answer to Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation therein. 13. In answer to Paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies each and every 2 2 of 7 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020 allegation therein. AS AND FOR A FIRST SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Any dainage, injury or loss of any nature allegedly sustaiñcd by Plaintiff was caused solely and exclusively, or in the alternative, partially by the negligence, carelessness, recklessness or otherwise improper or wrongful conduct or assumption of the risk, of Plaintiff or his/her agents or employees, of the owner of the apartiñêilt unit, or the subrogar, and was not caused by reason of, or in the alteiiiative, was not caused by the sole reason of wrongful or improper conduct of the third- any negligent, answering party defendant. AS AND FOR A SECOND SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That in the event that Plaintiff has or should in the future, settle any portion of the claims arising from the allegations contained in Plaintiff's coimpiãint with any currently named or stillto be named defendant(s), the respective rights of the reimaining parties should be deteriñiñêd pursuant to the General Obligations Law Section 15-108. AS AND FOR A THIRD SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrines of waiver, estoppel, and laches. AS AND FOR A FOURTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 3 3 of 7 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020 Plaintiff and/or subrogar has failed to mitigate their damages. AS AND FOR A FIFTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff has failed to join necessâry and material parties to this action, warranting the actions dismissal. AS AND FOR A SIXTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's claims are barred by other terms, conditions, limits, exclusion and limitations in the Admiral Indemnity Policy. AS AND FOR A SEVENTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Any damages or injuries suffered by Plaintiff was not caused by a negligent act or nmission of answering Defendant or any individual acting under their direction or control. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff received reniüileration and/or compensation for some or all of his claimed economic loss and that the defendants are entitled to have Plaintiff's award, if any, reduced by the amount of that remuneration and/or compensation, pursuant to Section 4545 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. AS AND FOR NINETH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 4 4 of 7 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020 AS AND FOR A TENTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Defendant, his agents servants and/or employees did not take part in or answering direct any of the acts complained of which resulted in Plaintiff's alleged dañiages. AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Plaintiff's deniages, ifany, were caused in whole or in party by a person or persoils who are not within the control of the answering defeiidant. AS AND FOR A TWELFTH SEPARATE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE If Plaintiff sustained darsages and/or injuries as alleged in the Verified Coinplaint, which is denied, there was an intervening, superseding cause or causes leading to this alleged damage, and therefore, any action/inaction on the part of the answering Defendant was not the proximate cause and/or competent producing cause of the alleged damages and/or injuries. AS AND FOR A CROSS CLAIM AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT STEPHEN PAGOT That if answering Defeñdant MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC is held liable to the Plaintiff, such liability arose solely and exclusively, or in the alternative, was caused the deliberate or errors or omissions of the above- partially by acts, segligence, carelessness, refereliced co-Defendant, and answering Defendant herein is entitled to be indemnified and/or receive contributions from the above referé1iced co-defendant for the amount of any verdict or judgment which may be recovered by the Plaintiff,ngainst the answering Defendant herein. 5 5 of 7 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020 WHEREFORE, Defendant MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC demands judgment against METROPOLITAN PROPERTY and CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY as subrogee of S R ROZBRUCH and YONINA JACOBS, dismissing the complaint together with all costs and disbursements of this action. Dated: White Plains, New York September 3, 2020 ROBERT A. PEIRCE #c ASSO IAfÈS By: Richard A Salvato Attorneys for Defendant MNYC REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC 8 Cottage Place White Plains, New York 10601 Tel: (914) 946-8200 TO: LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN I.HILSENRATH Attorneys for Plaintiff 65 Roosevelt Avenue Suite 103A Valley Street, New York 11581 Tel: (516) 341-7232 6 6 of 7 . FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/03/2020 05:03 PM INDEX NO. 154107/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/03/2020 VERIFICATION BY ATTORNEY RICHARD A. SALVATO an attorney at law, duly admitted to practice in the Courts of the State of New York, affirms that he has read the foregoing VERIFIED ANSWER, and that the same is true to the best of his knowledge, which is based on investigation, information, and belief. This Verification is not made by the ailswering defendant as he is not within the same where his nisintaim an office or defendant currently county attorney includes a governmental subdivision and this verification is made by a person acquaùited with the facts of this action. Dated: White Plains, New York September 3, 2020 kichard . Salvato 7 7 of 7