X

Transcription

1 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/17/ :21 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 5 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/17/2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x JEFFERSON SIEGEL, Plaintiff, -against- VERIFIED ANSWER Index No: BRADFORD S. BECKERMAN, Defendant, X Defendant, BRADFORD S. BECKERMAN (hereinafter ''Defendant"), by his attorneys Murray, Mancilla & Pantone, LLP, in answer to the Verified Complaint in the above captioned matter, alleges upon information and belief that: 1. Defendant denies the allegations contained within paragraph 1 of the Verified 2. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations contained within paragraph 2 of the Verified 3. Defendant admits the allegation contained within paragraph 3 of the Verified 4. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations containetl within paragraph 4 of the Verified 5. Defendant admits to being present at 100 Centre Street, New York, New York, on March 16, 2015 and July 11, 2016, but denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the other times mentioned in the Verified 6. Defendant denies the allegations contained within paragraph 6 of the Verified 1 of 7

2 7. Defendant denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations contained within paragraph 7 of the Verified 8. Defendant denies the allegations contained within paragraph 8 of the Verified 9. Defendant denies the allegations contained within paragraph 9 of the Verified 10. Defendant admits that he was arrested and charged with assault in connection with an incident that occurred on March 16, 2015 at 100 Centre Street, New York, New York, involving Plaintiff Jefferson Siegel, but denies that the arrest took place of March 16, Defendant admits that on July 11, 2015 Defendant pled guilty to the petty offense of disorderly conduct pursuant to Penal Law which is a violation of law and not a cnme. 12. Defendant denies the allegations contained within paragraph 12 of the Verified 13. Defendant denies the allegations contained within paragraph 9 of the Verified AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15. Plaintiff's claims are barred by the statute of limitations THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 16. Plaintiff's claims herein are barred by their material misrepresentations. 2 of 7

3 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17. The damages, if any, alleged to have been sustained by Plaintiff, were caused, in whole or in part, by the culpable conduct of Plaintiff. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18. The Plaintiffs damages are barred by the collateral source rule pursuant to CPLR SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 19. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the doctrine of assumption of the risk. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20. At all times relevant to the acts alleged in the complaint, defendant's actions were responsible, reasonable, proper, lawful, constitutional, made in good faith, and without malice. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his alleged damages. WHEREFORE Defendant respectfully requests that this Court dismiss the Verified Complaint of the Plaintiff herein, with costs and disbursements to Defendant, together with such other and further relief this Court finds just and proper. Dated: Kew Gardens, New York December 5, 2016 Joseph W. Murray Att rneys for Defendant DP RDS. BECKERMAN Queens Boulevard, Suite 5 Kew Gardens, New York of 7

4 Phone: (718) Facsimile: (718) of 7

5 ATTORNEY VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the Courts of the State of New York, state that I am the attorney of record for the defendant, BRADFORD S. BECKERMAN, in the within action; that I have read the foregoing VERIFIED ANSWER and know its contents; that it is true to my own knowledge, except as to matters alleged to be on information a11d belief, and as to those malli.:rs I bdicvc it to be tme. The reason that this verification is made by me and not by the defendant is because the defendant is not located in the county in which your affirmant maintains his office. The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows: Records contained in my file and conversations had with the defendant. I affirm that the foregoing statements are true, under the penalties of perjury. Dated: Kew Gardens, New York December 6, of 7

6 JEFFERSON v. BECKERMAN Supreme Court, County of New York Index No AFFIRMA TJON OF SERVICE Joseph W. Murray, an attorney duly admitted to practice law within the State ofnew York and maintaining a law office at Queens Blvd, Suite 5, Kew Gardens, NY does hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that on December 6, 2016, I did serve the VERIFIED ANSWER and NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by first class mail, postage prepaid, in an official depository under the exclusive care of custody of the United States Post Office, located at Queens Boulevard, Kew Gardens, New York 11415, to the last known address of the attorneys for the parties listed below. O'Dwyer & Bernstien, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff 52 Duane Street, 5 th Floor New York, New York Dated: Kew Gardens, New York December 6, of 7

7 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK JEFFERSON SIEGEL, -against- BRADFORD S. BECKERMAN, Defendant. VERIFIED ANSWER Index No: To: O'Dwyer & Bemstien, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff 52 Duana Street, 5 th Floor New York, New York Phone: (212) Murray, Mancilla & Pantone, LLP Attorneys for defendant BRADFORDS.BECKERMAN Queens Boulevard, Suite 5 Kew Gardens, New York Phone: (718) Pursuant to 22 NYCRR I 30-/.1-a, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, certifies that, upon information and belief and reasonable inquiry, (I) the contentions contained in the annexed document are not frivolous and that (2) if the annexed document is an initiating pleading, (i) the matter was not obtained through illegal conduct, or that it was, the attorney or other persons responsible for the illegal conduct are not participating in the matter or sharing in any fee earned therefrom that (ii) if the matter involves potential YCRR a. claims for pers9 ai ii ury or wrongful death, the matter was not obtq ed 11 violation o[, - Dated:/~ 7 of 7