FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/17/ :26 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/17/2016

Transcription

1 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/17/ PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF 01/17/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x HEMANT SHAH and VARSHA SHAH, -against- Plaintiffs, 20 EAST 64 TH STREET LLC, TRI STAR CONSTRUCTION CORP., URBAN FOUNDATION/ENGINEERING, LLC, ABELOW SHERMAN ARCHITECTS LLC, and RA CONSULTANTS LLC, Index No /15 Hon. Joan Kenney RESPONSE TO ABELOW SHERMAN ARCHITECTS REQUEST FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS Defendants x Plaintiffs Hemant Shah and Varsha Shah, by their attorney, Law Office of Kenneth G. Roberts, P.C., respond to the Demand for a Verified Bill of Particulars of defendant Abelow Sherman Architects LLC as follows 1. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the ground that it calls for evidentiary material. Notwithstanding and without waiving such objection, plaintiffs respond as follows From in or about November 2014 to present. 2. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the ground that it calls for evidentiary material. Notwithstanding and without waiving such objection, plaintiffs respond as follows The damage occurred throughout plaintiffs home at 22 East 64 th Street, New York, New York, including, but not limited to, masonry, foundation, interior and exterior walls, stairways, ceilings, skylights, internal and external doors and frames, windows, glass, woodwork, antique wall fabric, antique wall paper, decorative wood panels, gilded wood panels, mirrors, marble, stone, patio, flooring,

2 moulding, elevators, dumbwaiters, plumbing, electrical, fireplaces, and heating and ventilation system. Plaintiffs will provide documents evidencing the locations of the damage. 3. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions Notwithstanding and without waiving such objections, plaintiffs respond as follows The damage to plaintiffs home occurred as a result of defendants acts and omissions in connection with their excavation, underpinning, demolition and construction activities at 20 East 64 th Street, New York, New York. 4. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions Notwithstanding and without waiving such objections, plaintiffs respond as follows The damage to plaintiffs home occurred as a result of defendants acts and omissions in connection with their excavation, underpinning, demolition and construction activities at 20 East 64th Street, New York, New York. 5. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions Notwithstanding and without waiving such objection, plaintiffs respond as follows Among 2

3 other laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations, defendants have violated New York City Building Code , , and Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions Notwithstanding and without waiving such objections, plaintiffs respond as follows Plaintiffs are unable to respond until completion of discovery. 7. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions Notwithstanding and without waiving such objections, plaintiffs respond as follows The defendants acts and omissions in connection with their excavation, underpinning, demolition and construction activities at 20 East 64th Street, New York, New York, caused a dangerous and defective condition of which defendants had actual knowledge from at least November 2014 to date. 8. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions 3

4 interior and exterior walls, stairways, ceilings, skylights, internal and external doors and frames, documents evidencing their damages. 9. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions interior and exterior walls, stairways, ceilings, skylights, internal and external doors and frames, documents evidencing repairs and repair costs. 10. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions 4

5 interior and exterior walls, stairways, ceilings, skylights, internal and external doors and frames, documents evidencing their damages. 11. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions interior and exterior walls, stairways, ceilings, skylights, internal and external doors and frames, documents evidencing repairs and repair costs. 12. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions 5

6 interior and exterior walls, stairways, ceilings, skylights, internal and external doors and frames, documents evidencing transport and storage costs. 13. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions interior and exterior walls, stairways, ceilings, skylights, internal and external doors and frames, plumbing, electrical, fireplaces, and heating and ventilation system. In addition, among other damages, plaintiffs have sustained and/or will sustain loss of use of their home; engineering, architectural, legal and other professional expenses; moving, storage, insurance and temporary housing expenses during remediation; and lost profits from diminution of value and salability of plaintiffs home. Plaintiffs will provide documents evidencing their damages. 14. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions 6

7 interior and exterior walls, stairways, ceilings, skylights, internal and external doors and frames, plumbing, electrical, fireplaces, and heating and ventilation system. In addition, among other damages, plaintiffs have sustained and/or will sustain loss of use of their home; engineering, architectural, legal and other professional expenses; moving, storage, insurance and temporary housing expenses during remediation; and lost profits from diminution of value and salability of plaintiffs home. Plaintiffs will provide documents evidencing their damages. 15. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions and/or evidentiary material, and that it is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a bill of particulars. Notwithstanding and without waiving such objections, plaintiffs respond as follows Plaintiffs property insurance for their home had lapsed when the incident occurred. 16. Plaintiffs object to this demand on the grounds that it calls for legal conclusions Notwithstanding and without waiving such objections, plaintiffs respond as follows The damage to plaintiffs home occurred as a result of defendants acts and omissions in connection with their excavation, underpinning, demolition and construction activities at 20 East 64th Street, New York, New York. 7

8 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that plaintiffs reserve their right to supplement and/or modify the responses and objections herein. Dated January 15, 2016 LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH G. ROBERTS, P.C. By /s/ Kenneth G. Roberts 1865 Palmer Avenue, Suite 203 Larchmont, NY (914) Attorney for Plaintiffs 8

9 VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK ) )ss. COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) HEMANT SHAH, being duly sworn, deposes and says I am one of the plaintiffs in the within action. The foregoing Response to Demand for Bill of Particulars is true to my knowledge, except as to matters alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be ~~ Sworn to before me this I~ da ofjanuary,2016 Hemant Shah ANTHONY L INDEUCATO Notary York 10