FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/29/ :51 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/29/2015

Transcription

1 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/29/ PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF 03/29/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x HERTZ VEHICLES, LLC, Plaintiff, Index No /14 -against- CHARLES DENG, AC a/k/a CHARLES DENG ACUPUNCTURE, P.C., DARREN T. MOLLO, D.C. a/k/a MOLLO CHIROPRACTIC PLLC, FISS CHIROPRACTIC, PC, JEAN HUBERT FENELON RN, P.C., JULES FRANCOIS PARISIEN, M.D., KSENIA PAVLOVA, D.O., MAIGA PRODUCTS CORP., MIDDLE VILLAGE DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, P.C., MUDROCK MEDICAL, P.C., QUALITY CUSTOM MEDICAL SUPPLY, INC., PROMPT MEDICAL SERVICE C/O B & C EXPERT SEERVICE, INC., STONE ACUPUNCTURE, P.C. OMAR RODRIGUEZ, WAYNE SPENCER and HENRY THOM VERIFIED ANSWER Defendants x Defendant MIDDLE VILLAGE DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, P.C. by its attorney LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES E. KUTNER, LLP answering the complaint herein states as follows upon information and belief THE PARTIES 1. The defendant admits the truth of the allegations set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 1 through 16 inclusive. THE DEFENDANTS SPECIOUS NO-FAULT CLAIMS 2. The defendant admits the truth of the allegations set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 17 through 22 inclusive 1

2 3. The defendant denies the allegations set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 23 and 24. DEFENDANTS VIOLATION OF THE NO-FAULT REGULATIONS 4. The defendant denies in the form alleged the allegations set forth in the paragraph of the complaint numbered 25 except admits that MIDDLE VILLAGE DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, P.C. is the lawful assignee of OMAR RODRIGUEZ, WAYNE SPENCER and HENRY THOM in accordance with New York No-Fault Regulation 68-A (22 NYCRR 65.1 et seq) and that as the lawful assignee of OMAR RODRIGUEZ, WAYNE SPENCER and HENRY THOM, MIDDLE VILLAGE DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, P.C submitted claims to HERTZ VEHICLES, LLC, in accordance with New York No-Fault Regulation 68-A (22 NYCRR 65.1 et seq) under the insuring agreement issued and referred to in the complaint. 5. The defendant denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations set forth in the paragraph of the complaint numbered 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30, and The defendant denies in the form alleged the allegations set forth in the paragraph of the complaint numbered 31 except admits that if the answering defendant has filed and arbitration it is legally entitled to prevail. 7. The defendant denies the allegations set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 32 and 33. ANSWERING THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 8. The defendant repeats and reiterates each and every denial to the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 1 through 47 as if set forth fully and at length hereinafter. 2

3 9. The defendant denies each and every allegation as set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 35, 36, 37 and 38. ANSWERING THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 11. The defendant repeats and reiterates each and every denial to the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 1 through 38 as if set forth fully and at length hereinafter. 12. The defendant denies each and every allegation as set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 40, 41 and 42. ANSWERING THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 13. The defendant repeats and reiterates each and every denial to the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 1 through 42 as if set forth fully and at length hereinafter. 14. The defendant denies each and every allegation as set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 43, 44, and 45. ANSWERING THE FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 15. The defendant repeats and reiterates each and every denial to the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 1 through 45 as if set forth fully and at length hereinafter. 16. The defendant denies each and every allegation as set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 47, 48 and 49. ANSWERING THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 17. The defendant repeats and reiterates each and every denial to the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 1 through 49 as if set forth fully and at length hereinafter. 18. The defendant denies each and every allegation as set forth in the paragraphs of the complaint numbered 51 and 52. 3

4 AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21. Plaintiff s complaint fails to state a cause of action against the answering defendant herein. AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFNSE 22. The plaintiff failed to comply with No Fault Regulation 68-A (11 NYCRR 65.1 et seq). AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23. The answering defendant complied fully with the policy provisions of the HERTZ VEHICLES, LLC., Insurance Policy and New York No-Fault Regulation 68-A (22 NYCRR 65.1 et seq). WHEREFORE, the defendant demands judgment dismissing the complaint in its entirety together with the costs and disbursements incurred in defense of this lawsuit. Dated New York, NY February 26, 2015 Yours, etc., Charles E. Kutner Charles E. Kutner LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES E. KUTNER, LLP Attorney for Defendant MIDDLE VILLAGE DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, P.C. 950 Third Avenue 11 th Floor New York, NY Tel Fax ckutner@ckutner.com TO RUBIN, FIORELLA & FRIEDMAN LLP. Attorney for Plaintiff 630 Third Avenue, 3 rd Floor New York, NY

5 FISS CHIROPRACTIC P.C. 42 Richard Street Farmingdale, NY JEAN HUBERT FENELON RN, P.C. 541 Kirby Road Elmont, NY MURDOCK MEDICAL, P.C Murdock Ave St. Albans, NY QUALITY CUSTOM MEDICAL SUPPLY, INC. 33 Avenue U Brooklyn, NY CHARLES DENG ACUPUNCTURE, P.C. 254 Canal Street, 4 Floor New York, NY STONE ACUPUNCTURE, P.C Northern Boulevard Little Neck, NY JULES FRANCOIS PARISIEN, M.D Atlantic Avenue Brooklyn, NY KSENIA PAVLOVA, DO th Street, Suite 3524 Brooklyn, NY DARREN T. MOLLO, DC 1786 Flatbush Avenue Brooklyn, NY QUALITY CUSTOM MEDICAL SUPPLY, INC. 33 Avenue U Brooklyn, NY PROMPT MEDICAL SERVICES, P.C. 81 Sycamore Avenue Mt. Vernon, NY

6 V E R I F I C A T I O N CHARLES E. KUTNER an attorney admitted to practice before the Courts of the State of New York affirms the following to be true under the penalties of perjury I am the attorney for the defendant Middle Village Diagnostic Imaging, P.C. My office is located at 950 Third Avenue, 11 th Floor, New York, NY I have read the foregoing Answer to Complaint and know the contents thereof to be true to my knowledge except as to those matters alleged upon information and belief and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The reason this verification is made by me is that the defendant is not in the County where I maintain my office. The grounds of my belief as to all matters in the Answer not stated to be based upon my personal knowledge is a review of books, papers, memoranda, and other writings including files and correspondence maintained by my office as well as conversations with the defendant and other witnesses in its employ with regard to the allegations in this lawsuit. Dated New York, NY February 26, 2015 Charles E. Kutner 6