`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/06/2014 10:44 AMFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/09/2014 01:29 PM
`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK memzou “1111:29
`:
`
`NYSCEF Doc. NO.
`6
`
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6
`
`INDEX NO. 157729/2014INDEX NO. 157729/2014
`
`INDEX NO- 157729/2014
`
`
`
`
`
`R<.C«.IV«.D \IYSCEF: ‘018/063/2014
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/06/2014RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/09/2014
`
`
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`
`Index #1
`
`COUNTY OF NEW YORK
`___________________________________________________________________X
`
`Date Purchased:
`
`PEI JUN LI,
`
`SUMMONS
`
`-against-
`
`THE SALVATION ARMY,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`Plaintiff designates New
`York County as the place
`for trial
`
`Basis of Venue:
`Plaintiff’s residence
`
`Plaintiff’ 5 address:
`1780 1St Avenue, Apt. 14A
`-------------------------------------------------------------------X New York, NY 10128
`
`TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT:
`
`YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this 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 plaintiff s attorneys within twenty days after the
`service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service, where service is made by
`delivery upon personally within the state, or, within 30 days after completion of service
`where service is made in any other manner. 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, New York
`
`August 4, 2014
`
`299 Broa way — 17th Floor
`New York, New York 10007
`(212) 233-6686
`File No.: 11-2989
`
`TO:
`
`THE SALVATION ARMY
`
`268 Macopin Road
`Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403
`
`THE SALVATION ARMY
`120 West 14th Street,
`New York, New York 10011
`
`
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`COUNTY OF NEW YORK
`
`___________________________________________________________________X
`
`PEI JUN LI,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Index #2
`
`VERIFIED COMPLAINT
`
`-against-
`
`THE SALVATION ARMY,
`
`___________________________________________________________________X
`
`Defendant.
`
`Plaintiff PEI JUN LI, by her attorneys NOVO LAW FIRM, P.C., complaining
`
`of the Defendant, respectfully alleges, upon information and belief:
`
`PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiff PEI JUN LI was, and still is, a
`
`resident of the County of New York, State of New York.
`
`2.
`
`At all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY
`
`was, and still is, a domestic corporation, duly organized and existing under and by virtue
`
`of the laws of the State of New York.
`
`3.
`
`At all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY
`
`was, and still is, a foreign corporation, duly organized and existing under and by virtue of
`
`the laws of the State of New York.
`
`4.
`
`At all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY
`
`was, and still is a non-profit organization, duly organized and existing under and by
`
`virtue of the laws of the State of New York.
`
`5.
`
`At all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY
`
`was, and still is a limited liability partnership.
`
`
`
`6.
`
`At all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY
`
`was, and still is, a professional corporation.
`
`7.
`
`At all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY
`
`was, and still is, a proprietorship.
`
`
`FACTS
`
`8.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, and upon information and belief,
`
`Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY owned the premises, appurtenances, fixtures, and
`
`surrounding areas thereto located at and adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale,
`
`New Jersey 07403.
`
`9.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY operated the premises, appurtenances, fixures, and surrounding areas thereto
`
`located at and adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`10.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY managed the premises, appurtenances, fixtures, and surrounding areas thereto
`
`located at and adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`11.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY maintained the premises, appurtenances, fixtures, and surrounding areas thereto
`
`located at and adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`12.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY controlled the premises, appurtenances, fixtures, and surrounding areas thereto
`
`located at and adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`
`
`13.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY inspected the premises, appurtenances, fixtures, an surrounding areas thereto
`
`located at and adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`14.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY owned a camp, known as Star Lake Camp, at the premises located at and
`
`adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`15.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY operated a camp, known as Star Lake Camp, at the premises located at and
`
`adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`16.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY managed a camp, known as Star Lake Camp, at the premises located at and
`
`adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`17.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY maintained a camp, known as Star Lake Camp, at the premises located at and
`
`adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`18.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY controlled a camp, known as Star Lake Camp, at the premises located at and
`
`adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`19.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY inspected a camp, known as Star Lake Camp, at the premises located at and
`
`adjacent to 268 Macopin Road, Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403.
`
`20.
`
`That on or about August 6, 2011, Plaintiff PEI JUN LI was lawfully on
`
`the aforementioned premises.
`
`
`
`21.
`
`That on or about August 6, 2011, Plaintiff PEI JUN LI was lawfully on
`
`the aforementioned premises as a business invitee.
`
`22.
`
`That on or about August 6, 2011, Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY,
`
`its agents, servants, employees, and/or licensees negligently, recklessly, and carelessly,
`
`permitted the aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks,
`
`and/or pathways, specifically the one which Plaintiff was using, to be , become, and
`
`remain in a dangerous, unsafe, and defective condition therein.
`
`23.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY, its agents, servants, employees and/or licensees had a duty to operate the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one which Plaintiff was using, in a safe and proper manner.
`
`24.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY, it agents, servants, employees, and/or licensees had a duty to manage the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one which Plaintiff was using, in a safe and proper manner.
`
`25.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY, its agents, servants, employees, and/or licensees had a duty to maintain the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one which Plaintiff was using, in a safe and proper manner.
`
`26.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY, its agents, servants, employees, and/or licensees had a duty to control the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one which Plaintiff was using, in a safe and proper manner.
`
`
`
`27.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY, its agents, servants, employees, and/or licensees had a duty to inspect the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one which Plaintiff was using, in a safe and proper manner.
`
`28.
`
`That at all times herein mentioned, Defendant THE SALVATION
`
`ARMY, its agents, servants, employees and/or licensees had a duty to operate, manage,
`
`maintain, control, and inspect the aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the
`
`walkways, sidewalks, and/or pathways, specifically the one which Plaintiff was using, in
`
`a safe and proper manner.
`
`29.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, reckless, and careless in the ownership of the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one Plaintiff was using to be, become and remain in a
`
`dangerous, unsafe, and defective condition therein.
`
`30.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, reckless, and careless in the operation of the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one Plaintiff was using to be, become and remain in a
`
`dangerous, unsafe, and defective condition therein.
`
`31.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, reckless, and careless in the management of
`
`the aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`
`
`pathways, specifically the one Plaintiff was using to be, become and remain in a
`
`dangerous, unsafe, and defective condition therein.
`
`32.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, reckless, and careless in the maintenance of
`
`the aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one Plaintiff was using to be, become and remain in a
`
`dangerous, unsafe, and defective condition therein.
`
`33.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, reckless, and careless in the inspection of the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one Plaintiff was using to be, become and remain in a
`
`dangerous, unsafe, and defective condition therein.
`
`34.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, reckless, and careless in the control of the
`
`aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or
`
`pathways, specifically the one Plaintiff was using to be, become and remain in a
`
`dangerous, unsafe, and defective condition therein.
`
`35.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, reckless, and careless in the ownership,
`
`operation, management, maintenance, inspection, and control of the aforesaid premises,
`
`including but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or pathways, specifically the
`
`one Plaintiff was using to he, become and remain in a dangerous, unsafe, and defective
`
`condition therein.
`
`
`
`36.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, careless, and reckless in that it knew or
`
`should have known of the dangers created by failing to properly own, operate, manage,
`
`control, maintain, and/or inspect the aforesaid premises.
`
`37.
`
`That Defendant THE SALVATION ARMY, its agents, servants,
`
`employees, and/or licensees was negligent, careless, and reckless in that they violated
`
`their duties to persons lawfully on the aforesaid premises and to this Plaintiff PEI JUN
`
`L1 in particular, in knowingly permitting and allowing the aforesaid premises, including
`
`but not limited to the walkways, sidewalks, and/or pathways, specifically the one which
`
`Plaintiff was using to be, become and remain in a defective, unsafe, and dangerous
`
`condition, and were further negligent in failing to take suitable precaution for the safety
`
`of persons lawfully on the aforesaid premises, in failing to repair the defective condition,
`
`in failing to warn patrons of the defective condition, in failing to erect barricades to
`
`restrict use to persons lawfully on the aforementioned premises; in failing to properly
`
`hire/train/supervise its agents, servants, employees, and/or licensees; and in otherwise
`
`being negligent, careless, and reckless.
`
`38.
`
`That on or about August 6, 2011, while Plaintiff PEI JUN LI was
`
`lawfully on the aforementioned premises, she was caused to sustain serious and severe
`
`personal injuries as a result of the negligence, carelessness, and reckless of the
`
`Defendant.
`
`39.
`
`That the aforesaid accident and injuries resulting therefrom were due
`
`solely and wholly as a result of the careless and negligent manner in which Defenant
`
`THE SALVATION ARMY owned, operated, managed, maintained, controlled, and
`
`
`
`inspected the aforesaid premises, including but not limited to the walkways. sidewalks
`
`and/or pathways. specifically the one which Plaintiff was using, without Plaintiff PEI
`
`JUN Ll contributing in any way thereto.
`
`40.
`
`That by reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff PEI JUN Ll sustained severe
`
`and permanent personal injuries, and Plaintiff PEI JUN LI was otherwise damaged.
`
`41.
`
`That by reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff PEI JUN LI was compelled to
`
`and did necessarily require medical aid and attention, and did necessarily pay and become
`
`liable therefore, for medicines and upon information and belief, Plaintiff PEI JUN LI
`
`will incur similar expenses.
`
`42.
`
`That this actiori falls within one of more of the exceptions set forth in
`
`CPLR §1602.
`
`43.
`
`That by reason of the foregoing, Plaintiff PEI JUN LI has been damaged
`
`in a sum which exceeds the jurisdictional limits of all lower courts which would
`
`otherwise have jurisdiction.
`
`Wl-IEREFORE, Plaintiff demandsjudgment against Defendant herein on all causes
`
`of action, in a sum exceeding the jurisdictional limits of all lower courts which would
`
`otherwise have jurisdiction, together with the costs and disbursements of this action.
`
`Dated: New York, New York
`
`August 4, 2014
`
`Yours, etc.-, "'7
`
`
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF'S VERIFICATION
`
`ss.
`
`) )
`
`)
`
`STATE OF NEW YORK
`
`COUNTY OF NW5; llama,
`
`.
`
`l lg;
`
`5 L131
`
`
`
`ifi'l;
`
`, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
`
`I am a plaintiff in the Within action.
`
`I have read the foregoing
`
`SUMMONS AND VERIFIED COMPLAINT
`
`and know the COntents thereof. The same are true to my own personal knowledge, except as
`
`to those matters alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to
`
`be tri-ie. The basis of my personal knowledge and the matters alleged on information and
`
`belief includes the books and records in my possession and in the possession of my attorney.
`
`
`
`_ w
`
`SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS ‘(
`DAY OF glmyesé
`.20 [W
`
`AVG/2U“ 0/7
`NOTARY PUBLIC
`
`
`ANDREI VERKHAVETS
`Notary Public. 8mm of New York
`
`
`Regmtration #1}! 1.15692 '356
`Qoalitmd In hams Count
`
`
`Commissmn Expires .'.ug. 9.3014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Index No.
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`
`COUNTY OF NEW YORK
`
`
`PEI JUN LI,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`—against-
`
`THE SALVATION ARMY,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`SUMMONS AND VERIFIED COMPLAINT
`
`
`Novo Law Firm, PC
`Attorneysfor Plaintiff
`299 Broadway, 17'“ Floor
`New York, New York 10007
`
`(212) 233-6686
`
`
`
`TO:
`
`THE SALVATION ARMY
`
`268 Macopin Road
`Bloomingdale, New Jersey 07403
`
`THE SALVATION ARMY
`120 West 14'h Street,
`New York, New York 1001 1
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
