FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/20/2013 INDEX NO. 152552/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/20/2013 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------------)( ANITA CHANKO, as Executor of the Estate of MARK S. CHANKO, deceased, ANITA CHANKO, Individually, KENNETH CHANKO, BARBARA CHANKO and PAMELA CHANKO, Plaintiffs, -against- AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC., SEBASTIAN SCHUBL, M.D., ANIL S. RANAWAT, M.D., and TRAVIS MAAK, M.D., Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------)( Index No.: SUMMONS Plaintiffs designate NEW YORK COUNTY As Place of Trial Basis of Venue: Defendants' principal business location. Plaintiff resides at: 460 E. 79 th St., NY, NY To the Above Named Defendants: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in the action and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this summons, to serve a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiffs' Attomey(s) within twenty (20) days after the service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, Judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint. Dated: New York, NY March~, 2013 Yours, etc., MARK J. FOX, Q. Attorney for Plain iff LAW OFFICES OF MARK J. FOX 111 East 35 th Street New York, NY 10016 (212) 685-5015 American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. 77 W. 66 th St. N ew York, NY 10023 New York-Presbyterian Healthcare System, Inc. 1320 York Avenue, Room 715 New York, NY 10021
SEBASTIAN SCHUBL, M.D. C/O: Jamaica Hospital Ambulatory Care Clinic 89-00 Van Wyck Expressway Jamaica, NY 11418 TRAVIS MAAK, M.D. C/O University of Utah Orthopedic Center 590 Wakara Way Salt Lake City, UT 84108 ANIL S. RANAWAT, M.D. C/O: Hospital for Special Surgery 535 E. 70 th Street New York, NY 10021
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------------------x ANITA CHANKO, as Executor of the Estate of MARK S. CHANKO, deceased, ANITA CHANKO, individually, KENNETH CHANKO, BARBARA CHANKO, PAMELA CHANKO Index No.: Plaintiff, -aqainst- VERIFIED COMPLAINT AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., NEW YORK- PRESBYTERIAN HEAL THCARE SYSTEM, INC.,SEBASTIAN SCHUBL, M.D., ANIL S. RANAWAT, M.D., and TRAVIS MAAK, M.D. Defendants. -------------------------------------------------------------------------x Plaintiffs above named by their attorney, MARK J. FOX, ESQ., as and for a Verified Complaint against the above named defendants states the following upon information and belief: GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. That at all times hereinafter mentioned plaintiff ANITA CHANKO was and is still a resident of the City, County and State of New York. 2. That at all times hereinafter mentioned plaintiff KENNETH CHANKO was and is still a resident of the City, County and State of New York. 3. That at all times hereinafter mentioned plaintiff BARBARA CHANKO was and is still a resident of the City, County and State of New York. 1
4. That at all times hereinafter mentioned plaintiff PAMELA CHANKO was and is still a resident of the City, County and State of New York. 5. That MARK S. CHANKO died on April 29, 2011. 6. On July 7,2011 by Order and Decision of the Surrogate's Court of the State of New York, County of New York plaintiff ANITA CHANKO was granted Letters Testamentary for the Estate of MARK S. CHANKO, deceased. 7. That at a" times hereinafter mentioned defendant AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., was and still is a Delaware business corporation authorized to do business in the State of New York. 8. That at a" times hereinafter mentioned defendant NEW YORK- PRESBYTERIAN HEAL THCARE SYSTEM, INC., was and still is domestic Not-For-Profit corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. 9. That at a" times hereinafter mentioned defendant NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC., did business as NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAU WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER. 10. That at a" times hereinafter mentioned defendant SEBASTIAN SCHUBL was and still is a duly licensed medical practitioner under the laws of the State of New York. 2
11. That at all times hereinafter mentioned defendant ANIL S. RANAWAT was and still is a duly licensed medical practitioner under the laws of the State of New York. 12. That at all times hereinafter mentioned defendant TRAVIS MAAK was and still is a duly licensed medical practitioner under the laws of the State of New York. 13. That at all times hereinafter mentioned defendant NEW YORK- PRESBYTERIAN HEAL THCARE SYSTEM INC. was and still is the owner of NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL! WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER located at 525 East 68th Street in the County, City and State of New York 14. That at all times hereinafter mentioned defendant NEW YORK- PRESBYTERIAN HEAL THCARE SYSTEM INC. operated of NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL/ WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER. 15. That at all times hereinafter mentioned defendant NEW YORK- PRESBYTERIAN HEAL THCARE SYSTEM INC. managed and controlled NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAU WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER. 16. That at all times hereinafter mentioned NEW YORK- PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL/WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER was and still is a hospital. 17. That at all times hereinafter mentioned NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAU WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER invited members of the public including MARK S. CHANKO, deceased to become patients in said hospital. 3
18. That on April 29, 2011 MARK S. CHANKO, deceased was admitted as a patient at NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL / WEILL CORNEL MEDICAL CENTER and received medical treatment. 19. That on April 29, 2011 while MARK S. CHANKO, deceased was a patient at NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN/ HOSPITAU WEILL CORNELL defendants SEBASTIAN SCHUBL, M.D., ANIL S. RANAWAT, M.D. and TRAVIS MAAK M.D. were his treating physicians. 20. That ABC NEWS was and still is a division of defendant AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC. 21. That at all times hereinafter mentioned ABC NEWS was the producer of a broadcast television show named NY MED. 22. That on April 29, 2011 the television show NY MED was staged, produced and filmed at NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN/ HOSPITAU WEILL CORNELL HOSPITAL by ABC NEWS with the permission and consent of defendant NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN HEAL THCARE SYSTEM INC. 23. That on April 29, 2011 while he was receiving medical treatment at the said hospital by the above named physicians MARK S. CHANKO, deceased's image was filmed and his words were recorded by the agents servants and/ or employees of defendant AMERICAN 4
BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC. for use in an episode of the television show NY MED. 24. That on April 29, 2011 MARK S. CHANKO, deceased died while being treated by said hospital and physicians and his final words, treatment and death were recorded by defendant AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES INC. and used in an episode of NY MED that was first broadcast on the ABC television network on August 21,2012 and that was then rebroadcast as an on demand program and was made available for viewing on the internet. 25. That plaintiffs ANITA CHANKO, KENNETH CHANKO, BARBARA CHANKO and PAMELA CHANKO are MARK S. CHANKO, deceased's family and relatives and on April 29, 2011 were present at the hospital at the time he was treated and died. That at the said time and place defendant SEBASTIAN SCHUBL, M.D. and a social worker employed by defendant hospital verbally informed the said plaintiffs of the death MARK S. CHANKO. The delivery of the news of the death to the family was recorded by ABC NEWS and broadcast as a scene in the above described episode of NY MED. 26. That neither MARK S. CHANKO, deceased nor any of the plaintiffs were aware that they or the events above recited were being recorded and they never gave written or oral consent to the use and broadcasting and dissemination of any of the recorded events. 27. That plaintiffs first became aware that the medical treatment and death of MARK S. CHANKO, and the delivery of the news of the death to the family had been recorded for use in a television show when MARK S. CHANKO's widow, plaintiff ANITA CHANKO, watched a broadcast of the above described episode of NY MED on her television and when said episode 5
was subsequently viewed by each of the plaintiffs. 28. That the amount of damages sought in this action against the defendants exceeds the jurisdictional limits of all lower courts that would otherwise have jurisdiction. 29. Plaintiff's recovery shall not be limited by Article 16 of the CPLR or any other provision of law and is specifically excluded from such limitations by the exemption provided for in CPLR Section 1602(6). AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF ANITA CHANKO, AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF MARK S. CHANKO, DECEASED AGAINST ALL THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS 30. Plaintiffs repeat and reiterate each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 29 of the complaint with the same force and effect as if fully stated herein. 31. MARK S. CHANKO, deceased's image and voice was used by defendants as part of an episode of a reality based television show that they recorded, acted in, broadcast and disseminated on the television airwaves, on cable and on the internet. 32. Defendants used MARK S. CHANKO's image and voice for the purpose of advertising or trade in that they collected fees, advertising revenue and advertising for their hospital and their medical practices by broadcasting the television show. 6
33. Sections 50 and 51 of the New York City Civil Rights Law prohibit the use of a person's name, portrait, picture or voice for the purposes of advertising or trade without the written consent of the subject. 34. Defendants' use of MARK S. CHANKO's image and voice without Plaintiff's consent is a blatant violation of the New York Civil Rights Law. 35. As the direct result of the Defendants' violation of MARK S. CHANKO's right of privacy in contravention of New York statutory law, plaintiff's decedent has suffered injury in that his justified expectation of private medical care and private communication with his physicians without the intrusion of employees and staff of a commercial television station and non medical people into his hospital room was violated and in that his final extremis, and his last pain filled words and requests were recorded and broadcast for commercial and entertainment purposes, and he was deprived of a dignified death all for the financial benefit of defendants and the entertainment of strangers. 36. Defendants' conduct in using decedent's image and voice was intentional and wanton. 37. As a result of Defendants' knowing violation of the Civil Rights Law, punitive damages should be assessed against Defendants in the sum of Five Million ($5,000,000) Dollars. 7
AS AND FORA SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF ANITA CHANKO, AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF MARK S. CHANKO, DECEASED AGAINST ALL THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS 38. Plaintiffs repeat and reiterate each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 29 of the complaint with the same force and effect as if fully stated herein. 39. On April 29, 2011 defendants, their agents servants and/ or employees entered MARK S. CHANKO deceased's hospital room without his consent and full knowledge for the purpose of creating and recording an episode of a television show. 40. The defendants proceeded to film MARK S. CHANKO, deceased, in complete and direct invasion of his privacy; the defendants well knew that plaintiff's decedent was gravely ill and that he was thus defenseless in protection of his privacy. The defendants' action in that respect was outrageous and shocking and entitles the Plaintiff to punitive damages, for such unwarranted, unlawful, invasion of privacy. AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF ALL THE ABOVE NAMED PLAINTIFFS AGAINST ALL THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS 41. Plaintiffs repeat and reiterate each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 29 of the complaint with the same force and effect as if fully stated herein. 8
42. That on or before April 29, 2011 defendants, without the prior knowledge or consent of plaintiffs and plaintiffs decedent MARK S. CHANKO, willfully and maliciously installed and concealed listening and recording devices and video cameras in hospital rooms occupied by plaintiffs as a patient and as family of a patient. 43. Defendants recorded and videotaped several conversations of plaintiffs with each other and with hospital professional staff and disclosed said conversations to third persons including but not limited to the television audience of NY MED and employees and agents of defendant AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC. 44. Defendants' installation and concealment of said listening and recording and videotaping devices in the hospital rooms and the overhearing and recording of plaintiffs conversations and images invaded the privacy of Plaintiffs and of MARK S. CHANKO, deceased and intruded upon private conversations between them and physicians and related hospital professionals. Defendants' broadcast and dissemination of plaintiffs' private conversations and images constituted a further invasion of the plaintiffs' and decedent's right of privacy. 45. As a direct and proximate result of defendants' actions, plaintiffs have suffered extreme embarrassment and humiliation and severe mental and emotional distress. 9
AS AND FORA FOURTH CAUSE OF ACnON ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF ANITA CHANKO, AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF MARK S. CHANKO, DECEASED AGAINST ALL THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS 46. Plaintiffs repeat and reiterate each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 29 of the complaint with the same force and effect as if fully stated herein. 47. That defendants' unnecessarily, recklessly, and in conscious disregard of MARK S. CHANKO's rights disclosed and discussed his medical condition with cast members of NY MED and allowed them to videotape said conversations and videotape his medical treatment for broadcast and dissemination to the public in an episode of that television show. 48. That no member of the public had or has any legitimate interest in this information. 49. Defendants' disclosure of MARK S. CHANKO's medical information constitutes a violation of physician patient confidentiality and an invasion of his privacy and is a violation of State and Federal statutes protecting the privacy of medical records and information and violated paragraph 13 of the New York State Patients' Bill of Rights. 50. That defendants' disclosure of the deceased's medical information was intended by defendants to and did deprive him of his legal rights. For this reason, plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages. 10
AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF ANITA CHANKO, KENNETH CHANKO, BARBARA CHANKO, AND PAMELA CHANKO AGAINST ALL THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS 51. Plaintiffs repeat and reiterate each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 through 29 of the complaint with the same force and effect as if fully stated herein. 52. That defendants without the knowledge, permission, or consent of the family of MARK S. CHANKO, deceased allowed and permitted and caused defendant AMERICAN BROADCASTING SERVICES, INC. to broadcast and disseminate the videotape of the final moments of his life and the moment of his death. 53. That plaintiffs watched the said videotape on their televisions and were shocked and upset by what they saw. 54. Defendants acted intentionally, recklessly, and deliberately, and it was foreseeable that plaintiffs would be caused to suffer emotional distress. Alternatively, defendants acted with reckless disregard for the probability that they would cause plaintiffs to suffer emotional distress. 55. Defendants knew or should have known that emotional distress was the likely result of their conduct. 11
56. Defendants' conduct was extreme and outrageous, beyond all possible bounds of decency, utterly intolerable in a civilized community, and without privilege. 57. Defendants' actions were the sole and proximate cause of plaintiffs' emotional distress. 58. The emotional distress suffered by plaintiffs was severe and of such a nature that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it. 59. Plaintiffs are, and with a high degree of likelihood will continue to be, inflicted with emotional distress due to the intentional acts of defendants. 60. As a result of defendants' intentional conduct, plaintiffs have suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe and permanent physical symptoms, pain, anguish, severe emotional trauma, embarrassment, humiliation, pain and suffering, and severe emotional distress. WHEREFORE: 1. Plaintiff ANITA CHANKO as Executor of the Estate of MARK S. CHANKO, deceased demands judgment jointly and severally against all the above named defendants on the First, Second and Fourth Causes of Action for such an amount that may justly compensate for the injuries and loss of damages sustained by MARK S. CHANKO, deceased as determined at the time of trial all together with the costs and disbursements of this action including interest and attorney's fee thereon; and 12
2. All the above named plaintiffs demand judgment jointly and severally against all the above named defendants on the Third Cause of action for such an amount that may justly compensate for the injuries and loss of damages sustained as determined at the time of trial all together with the costs and disbursements of this action including interest and attorney's fee thereon; and 3. Plaintiffs ANITA CHANKO, individually, KENNETH CHANKO, BARBARA CHANKO and PAMELA CHANKO demand judgment jointly and severally against all the above named defendants on the Fifth Cause of action for such an amount that may justly compensate for the injuries and loss of damages sustained as determined at the time of trial all together with the costs and disbursements of this action including interest and attorney's fee thereon. Dated: New York, NY March 18, 2013 Yours, etc., MARK ~~~ J. FOX, SQ. Law Offices or ark J. Fox Attorney for Plaintiffs 111 East ss" Street New York, NY 10016 (212) 685-5015 13
STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) Kenneth Chanko being du1y sworn depose sand says: I am the Plaintiff in the within action; I have read the forgoing Complaint and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief and as to those matters, I believe it to be true. The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows: Based upon conversations with my attorney. ~ KENNETH CHANKO Sworn to before me on the 18th day of March, 2013 KJ. FOX NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF NEW YORK Registration No. 02F04626872 Qualified in New York County IL., Commission Ex ires December 17,20 \
STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) Kenneth Chanko being duly sworn deposesand says: I am the Plaintiff in the within action; I have read the forgoing Complaint and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief and as to those matters, I believe it to be true. The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows: Based upon conversations with my attorney. ~~ KENNETH CHANKO Sworn to before me on the 18th day of March, 2013 MARKJ.FOX NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF NEW YORK Registration No. 02F04626872 Qualified in New York County IL. Commission Ex ires December 17. 20~
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK Index#: ANITA S. CHANKO, as Executor of the Estate of MARK S~CHANKO, deceased, ANITA CHANKO, individually, KENNETH CHANKO, BARBARA CHANKO and PAMELA CHANKO, against Plaintiffs, AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., NEWYORK PRESBYTERIAN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC., SEBASTIAN SCHUBL, M.D., ANIL S. RANAWAT, M.D., and TRAVIS MAAK, M.D., Defendants. SUMMONS & COMPLAINT PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: LAW OFFICES OF MARK J. FOX Attorney for Plaintiffs 111 East 35th Street New York, NY 10016 Tel.: (212) 685-5015 Fax: (212) 685-5041 Signature (Rule 130.1.1-a) ---v--. _ ~."') I V\.--... i\/ T MARJ<J.FOX, ESQ~ V [ ] NOTICE OF ENTRY that the within is a true copy of an Order duly entered in the office of the clerk of the within named court on [ ] NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT that an order presented for settlement to the HON. Court, at of which the within is a true copy will be one of the judges of the within named Dated: New York, NY Yours, etc., MARK J. FOX, ESQ.