throbber
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/22/2023 02:20 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6
`
`INDEX NO. 701481/2023
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/22/2023
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`COUNTY OF QUEENS
`---------------------------------------------------------------------X
`WALTER GREGG, as Administrator of the Estate of
`MARION GREGG, deceased,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`-against-
`
`HIGHLAND CARE CENTER INC. d/b/a HIGHLAND
`CARE CENTER and ST. JOHN’S EPISCOPAL
`HOSPITAL,
`
`Defendants.
`---------------------------------------------------------------------X
`
`Index No. 701481/2023
`
`VERIFIED ANSWER
`
`Defendant, ST. JOHN’S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL, by its attorneys, BARTLETT LLP,
`
`as and for its Answer to plaintiff’s Verified Complaint, respectfully shows to this Court and
`
`alleges upon information and belief:
`
`AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`PURSUANT TO NEW YORK PUBLIC HEALTH LAW §2801-d AND §2803-c
`AGAINST HIGHLAND CARE CENTER INC. d/b/a HIGHLAND CARE CENTER
`
`1.
`
`Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained in paragraphs “1”, “2”, “3”, “4”, “6”, “7”, “8”, “9”, “10”, “11”, “12”, “13”,
`
`“14”, “15”, “16”, “17”, “18”, “19”, “20”, “21”, “22”, “23”, “24”, “25” and “26”, and respectfully
`
`refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court.
`
`2.
`
`Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs “5”, “27”, “28”, “29”, “30”, “31”,
`
`“32”, “33”, “34” and “35”.
`
`AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
`FOR NEGLIGENCE AGAINST DEFENDANT
`HIGHLAND CARE CENTER INC. d/b/a HIGHLAND CARE CENTER
`
`3.
`
`In response to paragraph “36”, defendant repeats each admission or denial made
`
`herein as though fully set forth hereat.
`
`1 of 7
`
`

`

`FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/22/2023 02:20 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6
`
`INDEX NO. 701481/2023
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/22/2023
`
`4.
`
`Deny knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained within paragraphs “37”, “38”, “39”, “40” and “41”.
`
`5.
`
`Denies the allegations contained in paragraph “42”.
`
`AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
`FOR GROSS NEGLIGENCE AGAINST DEFENDANT
`HIGHLAND CARE CENTER INC. d/b/a HIGHLAND CARE CENTER
`
`6.
`
`In response to paragraph “43”, defendant repeats each admission or denial made
`
`herein as though fully set forth hereat.
`
`7.
`
`Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained in paragraphs “44”, “45”, “46”, “47”, “48” and “49”.
`
`8.
`
`Denies the allegations contained in paragraph “50”.
`
`AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`AGAINST DEFENDANT ST. JOHN’S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL
`
`9.
`
`In response to paragraph “51”, defendant repeats each admission or denial made
`
`herein as though fully set forth hereat.
`
`10.
`
`Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
`
`allegations contained within paragraphs “53”, “54” and “55”, except admit that one MARION
`
`GREGG was a patient at ST. JOHNS EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL from on or about November 12,
`
`2020 and thereafter, during which time she received hospital services which were at all such
`
`times provided in accordance with good and accepted practice, and begs leave to refer to the
`
`applicable medical records as to the facts and circumstances attendant thereto, and respectfully
`
`refers all questions of law to this Honorable Court.
`
`11.
`
`Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs “52”, “56”, “57”, “58”, “59” and
`
`“60”.
`
`2
`
`2 of 7
`
`

`

`FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/22/2023 02:20 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6
`
`INDEX NO. 701481/2023
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/22/2023
`
`AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIFTH CAUSE
`OF ACTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`
`12.
`
`In response to paragraph “61”, defendant repeats each admission or denial made
`
`herein as though fully set forth hereat.
`
`13.
`
`Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs “62”, “63”, “64”, “65”, “66” and
`
`“67”.
`
`FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`14.
`
`That the damages of the plaintiff were caused in whole or in part by the culpable
`
`conduct of the plaintiff’s decedent which either bars the claims completely or else diminishes the
`
`damages by the proportion that such culpable conduct of the plaintiff bears to the total culpable
`
`conduct causing the damages.
`
`SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`15.
`
`That if any liability is found as against this answering defendant, then said
`
`liability will constitute 50% or less of the total liability assigned to all persons liable, and as
`
`such, the liability of this answering defendant to plaintiff for non-economic loss shall be limited,
`
`and not exceed this answering defendant’s equitable share, as provided in Article 16 of the
`
`C.P.L.R.
`
`THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`16.
`
`In the event plaintiff recovers a verdict or judgment against defendant, such
`
`verdict or judgment must be reduced pursuant to §4545 of the Civil Practice Laws and Rules by
`
`those amounts which have been, or will, with reasonable certainty replace or indemnify plaintiff
`
`in whole or in part for any past or future claimed economic loss, from any collateral source.
`
`FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`17.
`
`If plaintiff is entitled to recover damages for loss of earnings or impairment of
`
`3
`
`3 of 7
`
`

`

`FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/22/2023 02:20 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6
`
`INDEX NO. 701481/2023
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/22/2023
`
`earning ability as against this answering defendant by reason of the matters alleged in the
`
`Complaint, liability for which is hereby denied, then pursuant to CPLR §4546 the amount of
`
`damages recoverable against said defendant, if any shall be reduced by the amount of federal,
`
`state, and local income taxes which the plaintiffs would have been obligated by law to pay.
`
`FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`18.
`
`The answering defendant is entitled to a set-off to any recovery sought in this
`
`action, in the amount of the greater of the relative share of culpability or the amounts paid, if
`
`any, by any other tortfeasor, by operation of General Obligations Law §15-108 and Civil Practice
`
`Law & Rules §4533-b, and by operation of the doctrines of settlement, payment, release, accord,
`
`and satisfaction.
`
`SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`19.
`
`The plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a cause of action for which relief might be
`
`granted.
`
`SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`20.
`
`Plaintiff’s complaint fails to join indispensable parties necessary for the just
`
`adjudication of this matter.
`
`EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`21.
`
`The plaintiff lacks the capacity to sue.
`
`NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`22.
`
`That any claims for punitive damages contained in the Complaint fail to state a
`
`claim upon which relief may be granted, violate various provisions of the Constitution of the
`
`United States and the State of New York, and violate various statutory proscriptions thereof.
`
`23.
`
`Answering defendant alleges that it committed no act or omission that was
`
`malicious, oppressive, willful, wanton, reckless or grossly negligent and, therefore, any award of
`
`4
`
`4 of 7
`
`

`

`FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/22/2023 02:20 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6
`
`INDEX NO. 701481/2023
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/22/2023
`
`punitive damages is barred.
`
`24. With respect to plaintiff’s demand for punitive damages, answering defendant
`
`specifically incorporates by reference all standards of limitations regarding the determination and
`
`enforceability of punitive damage awards, including but not limited to, those standards or
`
`limitation which arose in BMW of North America v. Gore, 116 U.S. 1589 (1996), Cooper
`
`Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., 532 U.S. 424 (2001), and State Farm Mutual
`
`Automobile In. Co. v. Campbell, 123 S.Ct. 1513 (2003).
`
`25.
`
`To the extent that plaintiff seeks punitive or “exemplary” damages for the conduct
`
`which alleged caused plaintiff’s injuries as asserted in the complaint, such an award by this Court
`
`would violate this answering defendant’s federal and state constitutional rights.
`
`26.
`
`That the plaintiff’s Complaint does not set forth a basis for punitive damages.
`
`TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`27.
`
`This answering defendant pleads as an affirmative defense Public Health Law
`
`§3082, broadly defined as “immunity from any liability for healthcare facilities and professionals
`
`for treatment administered for Covid-19 during the period from the inaction of the statute to the
`
`end of treatment of the plaintiff’s decedent herein, pursuant to the terms of the statute so as to
`
`provide limited liability which is applicable as set forth above, since treatment was impacted by
`
`the defendant’s emergency response to Covid-19.
`
`ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
`
`28.
`
`The answering defendant, and each of them, claim the immunity from liability, as
`
`to each cause of action, afforded by the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act and
`
`Article 30-D of the Public Health Law, as it existed at the time of the treatment sued upon.
`
`WHEREFORE, this answering defendant demands judgment in its favor, together with
`
`5
`
`5 of 7
`
`

`

`FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/22/2023 02:20 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6
`
`INDEX NO. 701481/2023
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/22/2023
`
`the costs and disbursements of the within action.
`
`Dated: Central Islip, New York
`February 22, 2023
`
`TO:
`
`THE LICATESI LAW GROUP, LLP
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`423 RXR Plaza, East Tower
`Uniondale, New York 11556
`(516) 227-2662
`
`Yours etc.,
`BARTLETT LLP
`
`By:
`
`_______
`ROBERT F. ELLIOTT
`Attorneys for Defendant
`ST. JOHN’S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL
`320 Carleton Avenue, Suite 7500
`Central Islip, New York 11722
`Tel.: (516) 877-2900
`
`6
`
`6 of 7
`
`

`

`FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/22/2023 02:20 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6
`
`INDEX NO. 701481/2023
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/22/2023
`
`ATTORNEY'S VERIFICATION
`
`s.:
`
`)s
`
`)
`
`STATE OF NEW YORK
`
`COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
`
`ROBERT F. ELLIOTT, ESQ., being duly sworn, deposes and says:
`
`That he is a member in the firm of attorneys representing defendant ST. JOHN’S EPISCOPAL
`
`HOSPITAL.
`
`That he has read the attached Answer to plaintiff’s Verified Complaint and the same is true to
`
`his own belief, except as to matters alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, he believes
`
`them to be true to the best of his knowledge.
`
`That deponent's sources of information are a legal file containing correspondence, pleading and
`
`records, with which deponent is fully familiar.
`
`That this verification is made by deponent because his clients are not presently within the
`
`county where deponent maintains his office.
`
`______________________________________
`ROBERT F. ELLIOTT
`
`Sworn to before me this
`22nd day of February, 2023
`
`________________________
` Notary Public
`
` ANGELA R. GEGELYS
` Notary Public, State of New York
` No. 01GE6285829
` Qualified in Nassau County
`Commission Expires July 22, 2025
`
`7
`
`7 of 7
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket