On September 16, 2016 a
Answer
was filed
involving a dispute between
Carrion, Jennifer M,
Hashem, Saba,
and
D'Angelo And Hashem, Llc,
D'Angelo Law Group Llc And Nominally, D'Angelo And Hashem, Llc,
D'Angelo, Stephen L.,
for Equitable Remedies
in the District Court of Essex County.
Preview
lO ICVOIIF A
Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 1of5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
EASTERN DIVISION
Saba Hashem, Individually, and as a
Member of, and derivatively on behalf of,
D’ Angelo and Hashem, LLC
Plaintiff
v. Civil Action No: 1:16-cy-12383-IT
Stephen L. D’Angelo,
D’ Angelo and Hashem, LLC
and D’Angelo Law Group LLC
Defendants
rrr YY YW
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted that D’Angelo and Hashem, LLC is a limited liability company. Denied that it is,
or could be, a plaintiff in counterclaim.
4. Admitted.
5. Admitted. _
6. Admitted.
7. Denied.
8. Admitted, except that the allegation that Hashem fired Ms. Carrion is denied. The decision
to fire her was made by D’ Angelo.
Page 1 of 5wt
10.
lL.
12.
13.
14,
15.
16.
17.
18.
19,
20.
21.
22.
23.
24,
25.
Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 2 of S
Admitted that Ms. Carrion obtained judgment against Hashem and D & H; otherwise denied.
Admitted that D’ Angelo was not a defendant in the Carrion litigation; otherwise denied.
Admitted.
Denied.
Admitted.
Admitted.
Admitted.
Admitted.
Admitted,
Admitted.
Admitted that Hashem told D’Angelo he expected to be suspended from the practice;
otherwise denied.
Hashem is without sufficient knowledge to answer the allegations of this paragraph.
Admitted that the parties discussed that D’Angelo would form a new entity to practice law.
By way of further answer Hashem says that D’Angelo represented to him throughout that
when Hashem was reinstated to the practice of law they would resume practicing together.
Admitted that the parties discussed that D’Angelo would form a new entity to practice law.
Denied that Hashem agreed D & H would need to be closed or that disbarment was a likely
sanction.
Admitted.
Admitted.
Hashem is without sufficient knowledge to answer the allegations of this paragraph.
Page 20f 526.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 3 of 5
Hashem is without sufficient knowledge to answer the allegations of this paragraph.
Hashem is without sufficient knowledge to answer the allegations of this paragraph.
Count One
Responses | through 27 above are realleged as if set forth in full.
Denied.
Count Two
Responses | through 29 above arc realleged as if set forth in full.
In response to paragraph 31 Hashem says his claims and the claims he has brought on behalf
of D & H encompass more than a request for compensation for the work he performed for D
& H and include, but are not limited to, the damage the defendants have caused D & H anda
request that the defendants pay D & H the fair value of the work done by D & H for clients
who became clients of D’Angelo Law Group LLC, measured as of the date of Hashem’s
suspension from the practice of law.
Affirmative Defenses
First Affirmative Defense
The counterclaim fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Second Affirmative Defense
The plaintiff’s actions were not the direct and proximate cause of plaintiffs in
counterclaim’s alleged damages, if any.
Third Affirmative Defense
The plaintiffs in counterclaim, by their conduct and actions or the conduct and actions of
their agents and servants, are estopped to recover any judgment against Hashem.
Page 3 of 5Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 4 of 5
Fourth Affirmative Defense
The plaintiffs in counterclaim, by their conduct and actions or the conduct and actions of
their agents and servants, waived any and all rights they may have had against Hashem, and
therefore cannot recover in this action.
Fifth Affirmative Defense
The claims of the plaintiffs in counterclaim are barred by the doctrine of waiver or
telease.
Sixth Affirmative Defense
The claims of the plaintiffs in counterclaim are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands.
Seventh Affirmative Defense
The claims of the plaintiffs in counterclaim are wholly insubstantial, frivolous and not
advanced in good faith, and Hashem reserves the right to file a motion pursuant to the provisions
of M.G.L. c. 231, §6F.
Eighth Affirmative Defense
Stephen D’ Angelo and D’Angelo Law Group LLC have no right and no standing to bring
any claims on behalf of D’Angelo and Hashem, LLC, an entity to which Stephen D’ Angelo and
D’ Angelo Law Group LLC have done great harm and caused significant damage.
Wherefore Saba Hashem prays the counterclaim against him be dismissed and that he
recover his costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred in defending the counterclaim.
SABA HASHEM DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL COUNTS SO
TRIABLE.
Date: October 3, 2017
Page 4 of 5Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 5 of5
Saba Hashem
By his attorneys,
/s/__Albert L. Farrah, Jr.
Albert L. Farrah, Jr., Esq.
321 Columbus Avenue
Boston, MA 02116
(617) 742-7766
B.B.O. 159340
alf@farrah-law.com
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
SUFFOLK, ss. October 3, 2017
I hereby certify that a copy of this pleading was today served via the Court’s CM/ECF
filing system upon all registered users in this case, including counsel for defendants.
/s/ Albert L, Farrah, Jr., Esq.
Albert L. Farrah, Jr., Esq.
Page 5 of 5
Document Filed Date
February 27, 2019
Case Filing Date
September 16, 2016
Category
Equitable Remedies
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
lO ICVOIIF A Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 1of5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS EASTERN DIVISION Saba Hashem, Individually, and as a Member of, and derivatively on behalf of, D’ Angelo and Hashem, LLC Plaintiff v. Civil Action No: 1:16-cy-12383-IT Stephen L. D’Angelo, D’ Angelo and Hashem, LLC and D’Angelo Law Group LLC Defendants rrr YY YW 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted that D’Angelo and Hashem, LLC is a limited liability company. Denied that it is, or could be, a plaintiff in counterclaim. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. _ 6. Admitted. 7. Denied. 8. Admitted, except that the allegation that Hashem fired Ms. Carrion is denied. The decision to fire her was made by D’ Angelo. Page 1 of 5wt 10. lL. 12. 13. 14, 15. 16. 17. 18. 19, 20. 21. 22. 23. 24, 25. Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 2 of S Admitted that Ms. Carrion obtained judgment against Hashem and D & H; otherwise denied. Admitted that D’ Angelo was not a defendant in the Carrion litigation; otherwise denied. Admitted. Denied. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted. Admitted, Admitted. Admitted that Hashem told D’Angelo he expected to be suspended from the practice; otherwise denied. Hashem is without sufficient knowledge to answer the allegations of this paragraph. Admitted that the parties discussed that D’Angelo would form a new entity to practice law. By way of further answer Hashem says that D’Angelo represented to him throughout that when Hashem was reinstated to the practice of law they would resume practicing together. Admitted that the parties discussed that D’Angelo would form a new entity to practice law. Denied that Hashem agreed D & H would need to be closed or that disbarment was a likely sanction. Admitted. Admitted. Hashem is without sufficient knowledge to answer the allegations of this paragraph. Page 20f 526. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 3 of 5 Hashem is without sufficient knowledge to answer the allegations of this paragraph. Hashem is without sufficient knowledge to answer the allegations of this paragraph. Count One Responses | through 27 above are realleged as if set forth in full. Denied. Count Two Responses | through 29 above arc realleged as if set forth in full. In response to paragraph 31 Hashem says his claims and the claims he has brought on behalf of D & H encompass more than a request for compensation for the work he performed for D & H and include, but are not limited to, the damage the defendants have caused D & H anda request that the defendants pay D & H the fair value of the work done by D & H for clients who became clients of D’Angelo Law Group LLC, measured as of the date of Hashem’s suspension from the practice of law. Affirmative Defenses First Affirmative Defense The counterclaim fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Second Affirmative Defense The plaintiff’s actions were not the direct and proximate cause of plaintiffs in counterclaim’s alleged damages, if any. Third Affirmative Defense The plaintiffs in counterclaim, by their conduct and actions or the conduct and actions of their agents and servants, are estopped to recover any judgment against Hashem. Page 3 of 5Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 4 of 5 Fourth Affirmative Defense The plaintiffs in counterclaim, by their conduct and actions or the conduct and actions of their agents and servants, waived any and all rights they may have had against Hashem, and therefore cannot recover in this action. Fifth Affirmative Defense The claims of the plaintiffs in counterclaim are barred by the doctrine of waiver or telease. Sixth Affirmative Defense The claims of the plaintiffs in counterclaim are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. Seventh Affirmative Defense The claims of the plaintiffs in counterclaim are wholly insubstantial, frivolous and not advanced in good faith, and Hashem reserves the right to file a motion pursuant to the provisions of M.G.L. c. 231, §6F. Eighth Affirmative Defense Stephen D’ Angelo and D’Angelo Law Group LLC have no right and no standing to bring any claims on behalf of D’Angelo and Hashem, LLC, an entity to which Stephen D’ Angelo and D’ Angelo Law Group LLC have done great harm and caused significant damage. Wherefore Saba Hashem prays the counterclaim against him be dismissed and that he recover his costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred in defending the counterclaim. SABA HASHEM DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL COUNTS SO TRIABLE. Date: October 3, 2017 Page 4 of 5Case 1:16-cv-12383-IT Document 60 Filed 10/03/17 Page 5 of5 Saba Hashem By his attorneys, /s/__Albert L. Farrah, Jr. Albert L. Farrah, Jr., Esq. 321 Columbus Avenue Boston, MA 02116 (617) 742-7766 B.B.O. 159340 alf@farrah-law.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE SUFFOLK, ss. October 3, 2017 I hereby certify that a copy of this pleading was today served via the Court’s CM/ECF filing system upon all registered users in this case, including counsel for defendants. /s/ Albert L, Farrah, Jr., Esq. Albert L. Farrah, Jr., Esq. Page 5 of 5