SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF BRONX -..-....-------- ENEIDO ROMERO, Plaintiff, X Index No.: 25244/2014E -against- VERIFIED ANSWER 755 COOP CITY ASSOCIATES, LP; TRIANGLE EQUITIES MANAGEMENT CO., LLC and PETERMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Defendant. ---------------------------------------------------------------- X PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that defendant, PETERMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. by its attorneys, GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP as and for a Verified Answer to the plaintiff's Amended Complaint, respectfully alleges the following upon information and belief: 1. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth the allegations contained in paragraphs "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9", "10", "11", "12", 3n 3» ca]4~> 4» 5» 5n 6» gt 7» 7t~ 8» ca]91' 9» ca20to c<20» "14", "15", "16", "17", "18", "19", "20", "21" and "22" plaintiff's Amended Complaint. 2. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraphs "23", "25", "26", "27", c 4>29» 0'»'»t'0 0432» cc32'l0 39l 3» 5'» 57% 69t 6» 7v! 7» at9 Lc397l 6439» "28", "29", 643 "31", "32", 403 463 "36", "37", "38",» "39", "40" and "42" plaintiff> plaintiff's Amended Complaint. 3. Admits each and every allegation contained in paragraph "24" plaintiff's Amended Complaint. 4. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph "34" plaintiff's Amended Complaint but Admits that Defendant, PETERMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. had a contract to perform sweeping and cleaning the parking lot. ]I 1 8
5. Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph "41" plaintiff's Amended Complaint and respectfully refers all questions law to the Court. AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 6. In accordance with Article 14 the C.P.L.R., the defendant reserves its rights to assert in mitigation damages the culpable conduct attributable to the plaintiff. AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 7. The defendant reserves its right to claim the limitation liability for noneconomic loss provided pursuant to Article 16 the CPLR. AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 8. Plaintiff assumed the risk all the dangers intended upon the activity upon which plaintiff was engaged at the time the alleged accident and is therefore barred from recovering on the claim asserted. All the damages and risk incident to the situation mentioned in the Complaint were open, obvious and apparent, and were known and assumed by plaintiff. In assuming the risks attendant with his conduct, plaintiff failed to act as a reasonable and prudent person with regard to his own safety and well being. AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 9. This answering defendant did not breach any duty to plaintiff. AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 10. To the extent that plaintiff recovers any damages for the cost medical care, dental care, custodial care or rehabilitative services, loss earnings and/or other economic loss, the amount the award shall be reduced by the sum total all collateral reimbursements, from 2 2 8
whatever source, whether it be insurance, social security payments, Workers' Compensation, employee benefits or other such programs, in accordance with the provisions C.P.L.R. 4545. AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 11. Any injuries sustained or suffered by the plaintiff, as stated in the Amended Complaint, were caused in whole or in part by the comparative/contributory negligence the plaintiff. AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 12. The defendant alleges, upon information and belief, that whatever injuries were sustained by the or whatever damages were sustained by the plaintiff at the time and place alleged in the Verified Complaint were the result the culpable conduct the plaintiff and the defendant pleads such culpable conduct in diminution damages. If a verdict or judgment is awarded to plaintiff, then and in that event, the damages shall be reduced in the proportion which the culpable conduct attributable to the plaintiff bears to the culpable conduct which caused the damages. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 13. If plaintiff was caused to sustain damages at the time and place set forth in the plaintiff's Amended Complaint, it was due to the culpable conduct person or persons presently unknown. AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 14. The Complaint fails to join appropriate parties in this action. 3 3 8
AS AND FOR A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN ASSOCIATES, INC., LLC, RESPECTFULLY ALLEGES: 15. Plaintiff failed to mitigate, obviate, diminish or otherwise act to lessen or reduce the injuries, damages and disabilities alleged in the Complaint. AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 16. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint fails to state a cause action upon which relief can be granted. AS AND FOR A TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 17. This Honorable Court lacks personal jurisdiction over the answering defendant. AS AND FOR A THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 18. This Honorable Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter at issue in this action. AS AND FOR A FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 19. The answering defendant denies the existence a defective condition and/or hazard as alleged, but to the extent one is found to have existed, said condition and/or hazard was open and obvious to all persons frequenting the property for which no warnings or notices were required. AS AND FOR A FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 20. The alleged injuries suffered by plaintiff was not proximately caused by the alleged accident at issue in this action or by any actions the answering defendant. 4 4 8
AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT, PETERMAN 21. If plaintiff has suffered any damages as alleged in the Amended Complaint, such damages are the results acts or omissions third-parties over whom defendant has no control or right control, without defendant contributing thereto in any way. AS AND FOR A CROSS-CLAIM FOR COMMON LAW INDEMNITY AGAINST THE CO- DEFENDANTS, 755 COOP CITY ASSOCIATES, LP AND TRIANGLE EQUITIES MANAGEMENT CO., LLC, RESPECTFULLY ALLEGE: 22. If the plaintiff was caused to sustain damages at the time and place set forth in the plaintiff's Amended Complaint through any carelessness, recklessness, and/or negligence other than the plaintiff's own, such damages were sustained in whole due to the primary and active carelessness, recklessness, and/or negligent acts or omissions, or commissions by the codefendant named above, his agents, servants, and/or employees with the negligence the answering defendant, if any, being secondary, derivative, and by operation law. Further, if plaintiff should recover judgment against the answering defendant, then the answering defendant is entitled to common law indemnification from and judgment over and against the codefendants for all or any part any verdict or judgment which the plaintiff may recover in such amounts as the Court or jury may direct. By reason the action, said answering defendant has been and will be put to costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees. AS AND FOR A CROSS-CLAIM FOR COMMON LAW NEGLIGENCE AGAINST THE CO- DEFENDANTS, 755 COOP CITY ASSOCIATES, LP AND TRIANGLE EQUITIES MANAGEMENT CO., LLC, RESPECTFULLY ALLEGE: 23. If the plaintiff was caused to sustain damages at the time and place set forth in the plaintiff's Amended Complaint through any carelessness, recklessness and/or negligence other than the plaintiff's own, such damages were sustained in whole or in part by reason the 5 5 8
carelessness, recklessness, and negligence, and/or negligent acts or omission or commission by the co-defendants named above, his/their agents, servants, and/or employees. Further, if plaintiff should recover judgment against the answering defendant, then the co-defendants shall be liable to the answering defendant on basis apportionment responsibility for the alleged occurrence, and the answering defendant is entitled to contribution from and judgment over and against the co-defendants for such or part any verdict or judgment which plaintiff may recover in such amounts as a jury or Court may direct. AS AND FOR A CROSS-CLAIM FOR CONTRACTURAL INDEMNITY AGAINST THE CO- DEFENDANTS, 755 COOP CITY ASSOCIATES, LP AND TRIANGLE EQUITIES MANAGEMENT CO.3 LLC, RESPECTFULLY ALLEGE: 24. If the plaintiff was caused to sustain damages at the time and place set forth in plaintiff's Amended Complaint through any carelessness, recklessness, and/or negligence other than the plaintiff's own, such damages were sustained solely and directly by the reason carelessness, recklessness, and negligence and/or negligent acts or omission or commission by the co-defendants named above, his/their agents, servants, and/or employees. The co-defendants and the answering defendant herein entered into a contract wherein the co-defendants agreed to hold harmless, and indemnify, and assume the defense the answering defendant. By reason the foregoing, the answering defendant is entitled to contractual indemnification from and judgment over and against co-defendants for all or any part any verdict or judgment which the plaintiff may recover in such amounts as the Court or jury may direct. By reason the action, said defendant has been and will be put to costs and expenses, including attorney's fees. WHEREFORE, defendant, PETERMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.., demands judgment dismissing the plaintiff's Amended Complaint, together with the costs and disbursements this action. 6 6 8
Dated: Harrison, New York January 24, 2018 Respectfully Submitted, GORD REES, LLP By: Allyson ila Attorneys for efendant PETERMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. 500 Mamaroneck Ave, Suite 503 Harrison, New York 10528 914-777-2211 To: FELICETTI LAW FIRM, P.C. Attorney for Plaintiff 557 Grand Concourse, Suite 159 Bronx, New York 10451 (718) 301-8233 THE LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS K. MOORE Attorney for Defendant 755 COOP CITY ASSOCIATES, LP AND TRIANGLE EQUITIES MANAGEMENT CO., LLC 701 Westchester Avenue, Suite 101W White Plains, New York 10604 (914) 285-8500 7 7 8
ATTORNEY'S VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) ) ss.: ALLYSON AVILA, an attorney duly admitted to practice before the Courts this State, affirms under C.P.L.R. Rule 2106, as follows: 1. I am a member at the law firm GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP, attorneys for the answering Defendant in this action. I have read the preceding Answer and know its contents. Its contents are true to my own knowledge, except as to those matters that are stated to be alleged upon information and belief. 2. As to those matters which are alleged upon information and belief, I believe them to be true. 3. The grounds my belief as to those matters that are not stated upon my own knowledge are the contents the file maintained in connection with this matter by my fice. 4. This affidavit is made by me and not by the answering Defendant since the answering Defendant is not located in the same county within which your Affirmant maintains her fice. Dated: Harrison, New York January 24, 2018 v' Ally on v 8 8 8