FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 01/02/2013
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 43
`
`INDEX NO. 58588/2012
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/02/2013
`
`
`
`FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 012013
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 43
`
`
`
`
`
`INDEX NO. 58588/2012
`agfi
`
`
`
`3833RE$E CGURT OF THE STA? 4C}? NEW YORK
`CQUNTY {:3}: WESTCHESTER
`...............waflmm---"“w.-_,--_--~_m_--__----m---”MM};
`Emma $39313?st
`
`E‘QQTiC‘E a}; mfiz‘ifiy
`Piaimifi MW
`
`‘against-
`
`613‘? OF NEW ROCHELLE, COUNTY OF-
`WESTCHESTER, GEGRGE A. HELLER CGMPAE‘QY, INC,
`TRUMP PLAZA NEW ROCHELLE CONDGMSQUM ANS)
`UNITED WATER NEW ROCHELLE iNCw
`
`indax Ni}, i§353f18
`
`Hfifi. 302m 8- Lefkawiizg
`
`
`
`......................................................................."X
`
`Defendants,
`
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, upon the affim’aatian 0f Evan D. Yagerman datad July
`
`24, 20129 and upen all the pleadings and proceedings had herein? the undersigned will name this
`
`Ceurt at an individual £31333gnmsn: Pam at the Couriheuge {mated a: 11 1 Dr. Martin Luther King,
`
`Er, Beulevard, White Plains, NY 10601, an August 22, 2012 at 9:30 o’clock in the foreman Of
`
`that day, 01‘ as 30013 thereafixer as mange} can be heard. 'er an order conselidafing Aeration N0. 2
`
`with Action No‘ 1 far all purposa‘s, vacating maimifi‘s Siatemeni of Rsadiness in Action N0. 1,
`
`33$ng the Mafia 81“ issue in Actien N0.
`
`1 and keeping fictim N0.
`
`1 {mm the {Tia} cakndar 0r
`
`keeping 328 case from %€§ng placaé {hereen until complézmce with the 111323 of calendar prasztisze
`
`offhig Cami, as: wan extenéing 313, Qafiiafi :ime :0 fiée a summary judgmem mefion and granting
`
`sue?) whey and faiths? reiisfas a} this Court mg}: seem jgsa §F£3§E€£ and eguiizfiaifi.
`
`3i}2§¥€~s§1§§i§$é agié‘ém “£3 {a T€€r§1§’€?2fl{}§£§a§y
`
`{iaiiaags’sg i132" 'figéfig igjafi‘y.
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`fiEASE ’fAKE FER?HER NGTICE 55:02.2 5%: {squimd t9 sew/c answefiag ai’fidaviis
`
`3’3‘g'en {3?} days béfbm {ha ream; {Eats hams?
`
`fixed:
`
`YUfk? New Yerk
`hi}! 3%, 3313
`
`Years, 856”
`
`SMYGJ MAZURE DiRECTOR WILKENS Y08NG
`£5}: YAGERMAN, RC.
`
`5
`
`Trump Plaza New Rochefle C@iniutn
`
`‘V
`
`‘
`
`EVAN D. YAGERAEW
`For 1312 Firm
`-
`
`Attomeys fer Defendant
`
`l} 1 John Street
`
`New York, NY 10033
`{212) 96414013
`Our Fibs N0. 2133161946
`
`(Caunty 6f W’estchester has, beaten granted Summary Judgment}
`The County (31’ Westchestay
`(:50 Office of Ceum‘y Attorney
`148 Maritime AVfinue, Ream 600
`White Plains, NY 10603
`(914) 2853690
`
`Corpmatien Counsd ofthe City GfNew Rosheiie
`515 N01th Avsaaa
`
`New Recheiie. NY 18801—3416
`(9&4) 654~Z§2i§
`Attemey for Disikndmfi
`{333’ {:stw Reahciiiz, NY
`
`Efléeaéé, ii)?
`Eiafi‘égg‘afifi, {kg-3
`23 5
`3? @3322 Sirfifia
`@Efiéé: fiaéfig, E33? Eé‘éi}
`{33%; ééié4§§i§§f§§§4§ §8é~駧3£ {E5}
`Afigméy f2}? Bgé’méam
`{EQGE‘QQ 5%“ F 5&1" {Emma}; Egg:
`233$ Baiégéaai in ficzéim Ni}. 2
`{Tagfifiéfi ifnéfiggfii‘iga‘é;
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Bark? Garden 5:: Seaway
`Afiemay f0? Befeadan: if; fiaé’isfi Na 2
`Csruyzi §pr£§§§€$ LLC‘;
`EQ Bani: Simian Suite 7985
`Whit»? P153333,
`iiiééé
`{9:4} 991811321}
`
`iiishfiald Cave, IL?
`420 Lexingian gainezzuet Suiié 21134
`"New York NY 161 ?0
`~
`(212} 4&34-GEGGfif212} 434-8105: {F}
`Afioméy for Defindafit
`United Waia New Rochelle Inc.
`
`Sega} & Lax, Esqs.
`5G1 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2004
`NBWYQi‘k,
`10017
`(212} 922-0891/(2123‘922—0896 (F)
`Attorney for Piainiiff
`Elaine Hudson
`
`i?!) WM?
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`S‘UFREME {BERT Ct? YHE STAFE C3? NEW YORK
`COSEKETY {3? EEJESTCEESTER
`........................................................................“:2;
`815‘; 5N i3 H U ESQN 3
`
`Piaimi ff;
`
`—agaifis‘i~
`
`§§¥ii§§iAT§0§§ 12‘s? SE933‘8R’?
`
`Asiiea NO.
`
`I Ifléax N9, ESBEBfiS
`
`Ham. 39323 8. Leféééswéiz, 333C.
`
`C??? 0? NEW RSCHELLE, CfifiNT‘Y OF
`E¥ESTCHESTEK {EEORGE 4%. ¥ULLER CGMFANY, 355C,
`TRUMP PLAZA NEW RGCHELLE CQNQQMINIUM AND
`UNITED WATER NEW RGCHELLE NC,
`
`Defendants.
`......................................................................."X
`ELAJNE HUSSON
`
`maimiffi
`
`Action N0. 2 Index No. 5858852012
`
`«against—
`
`CAPPELLI ENTERPRiSES AND CERUZZI PRO?ERTZES,
`LLC.,
`
`Béfmdanig.
`_______________________________________________________________________--X
`
`Evan D. Yagem‘iam an afiomey duly admiiied to pz‘actige law in the CGLHTS ofNew Yerk.
`
`hereby affirms gm iruth fifths: fbiiawing under pmaliy of péz‘jurjg 33d @ursuant to CPLR 2106:
`
`L
`
`i am an asseciatfi 0f the firm 0f Smifié M32138 Dimezor waking Young, &
`
`Yagemzan, 9C“ atigrnéy f0? deiéndam Trump P1323 Eew Rfifihfiilfi Cmdeminiu‘m 3115‘: I am
`
`{iii}? iamééiar wéih EEK: fiiais and fiéfcums‘izmee sarmunééag {he Wiihin away},
`
`Z
`
`@3125 gif’fimmiigfi
`
`is; 333% én
`
`sagpsafi
`
`:3? $13 iggiami 3:05:33 'é‘i}? at:
`
`{Eféfii‘
`
`{saggaiiéaéiég fifiééi‘éé‘: @254}.
`
`’2 Vaiih fiéfiiifig N0.
`
`E
`
`fa)? 23$ gamma vaczgiiigg piaégéiéfi‘éa Sizfigmémi {3f
`
`6
`
`/
`
`fig}.
`
`E and iicsagééfég fig/siéazé N6» 3
`
`frag: fast: SEES agéaizégai’ is}? §QQ§§§1§ fix:
`
`étmé 536mg giggeé éhfiraim ifiéiii COEE?§3¥ECC saith 333%:
`
`it}? caéfiafizfi fi'fiii‘jiégé‘ {13%333 {79%; as walé micgéégg 22E? gaméei; 333%:
`i
`v
`;
`
`fig; {2&2 a mmmayv
`y
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`judgmsni 323060;} Eifiifil grammg such ether and filfihéi‘ rfiliitf as :0 the C5351?
`
`35:61: 3113‘; ami
`
`gage;
`
`?RGCEB§§RAL HiSTQRY
`
`3,
`
`fizzéméff cemmawsé Asiicn Ne.
`
`l by file 53ng 0f 3 summgns and complaim on
`
`m amimd June 3, Eiélf}. Befendam Trump Plaza New Rochelle Candeminium ifiéexpesseé a1}
`
`Afiswar can Jul};
`
`2033. Furiher, all mixer defeadants interpased Aflswars. Copifis of all
`
`plaadings am annemd hereto as Exizibit “A ”. Plaintiff’s Verifian Bill of Pafiicuiars is annexed
`
`hefeia as Erisiéit “B”.
`
`4*
`
`This actign slams from an alleged slip and fall which, weaned Outside of ihs
`
`premises; known as 175 Hugué‘not Street, N€W Rachelle, Naw York. Th6 Caumy of Westchester
`
`was dismigsed from the cage, as a result 01“ 21 111011913, to dismiss prior to dspogitlsns. Plaintiff
`
`Elaine Hudsen was dapesed 011 March 3, 2012. A copy of ha transcript is annexeé his:er as
`
`Erizibit “C”. At plainiifl’s Examinatign befare Trial she identified the area where: her accident
`
`toek plaCé: Whish is adjacefit
`
`t5 175 Huguenot 81mm in fmnt of what
`
`is allege-3d to be a
`
`commsrcial premi5€s.
`
`Further, phoiographs wens idantified a: plaintiff’s Examinatian befare
`
`Trial which are annexed harem as Exhibit “B”.
`
`:5.
`
`5X31 dfi‘sndanis mam depoged an varying dates. Hewwer, Danéézlle Dibeng was
`
`{lepesaé {3n béhaéf 6f §3§G¥'li}g dfiiféi‘idaflt (3:52 Agél 2”} 25512; A {saw of RS? {ramsstg’éigi is mama
`
`hay/*3; 233 Erigiéié “$593 TEE? Wilma; Efigiéfiegl a: fiat? Examénaéégn Ee‘flgfaz: “ifiai Ella: fizz: 2132623 whgg'e
`
`giaéfiiig iésiaééfieé he? zigcéiism {69%. glam
`
`azatgmmamigl gmmigeg {mi awmi magagad,
`
`fizéé'gimllcé, e3? fiéaéaéaéiaed by 3?me $152353:
`
`léocéslifi {Eiééiééfilfiifiifi
`
`E2223. {Eibms ifigiified
`
`:l/‘gai Cagpfiléi iin‘ifi‘EEEéSQS 11mm Elie Ciémmazméal uni; Emil ls maizagsé by Ceruzzi E’mgcfiééa LLC
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`‘ii’iaintiff flied he? EQeie eé‘ Esme en 01‘ ahead: Ease ?, EQEZ. A see}; of same is annexed hereto a3
`
`Eigeiéi: “F”;
`
`e.
`
`Feiiewing {he {fling ef the Neie 8?? issue in g-Eeiiee Ne.
`
`1,, piaieiiff ereught a
`
`seeend aeiéen siemming {fem {he Same incident by filing the Summens and Cempiein: 0e at
`
`around May 25,, 2812. This seeend aetien was flied against Caepelli Emerprises and Cemzzi
`
`fiepefiieg, LLC., with an Index No. ef SSSSSEBQIB. Aenexed herete is a see}; ef Aeiien Ne. 2‘s
`
`Summong and Complaint as Exhibit “G”.
`
`7.
`
`Further? plaintiff has not yet appeared fer an independent medicai examinatien in
`
`Action N0. 1.
`
`it is unknewn whether independent medical examination has been scheduled.
`
`ARG UMENT
`
`8.
`
`Actions N0.
`
`3 and 2 must fie eensoiidated for all purpeses, discevery and trial, as
`
`they arise out efthe same alleged incident and inveive commoa questions of law and fact.
`
`it is
`
`respectfuiiy requested thatjoint iriai of said actions be granted per CPLR Sectien 602 to amid a
`
`multiplicity eflawsuits. and to save censiderabie time and expense.
`
`9.
`
`Censeiidatien of related aetiong is deemed the mesi expedient method 1:0 resehfe
`
`them and is in the best interest efjudieiai econemy. CPLR Seciien 682(3) pi‘OVidfiS in pertinent
`
`“When eetéees inveiving eemmen qeegiiene 0f 121w er feet: are eeeéieg befefe :3 seem, {be
`we??? egee meiéee, may flee; the ee‘iieee eeeeeiifizfiee aged me}! take 352%: eieer eciiees
`eeeeemifig pfeeeeéiegs iiéezein may {eeé {e ayeéd eeeeeeegaw eesé’s eefi éeieyg,”
`
`3%}:
`
`{feeeelieesfien i3 eepgfepeéeie 'Wir‘zefe wees, inveéee eemeaen {geeefieee e? iew e?
`
`
`w,
`M;
`eei. 839323; 2:. {Eeeefiweed ‘e’iéiege Gem. Sen 322$” 25% Ag} “(3 326, 5&3
`
`2
`
`.
`
`2?“
`
`,
`39%}.
`
`k,
`é
`éea’eifiegz eemmen eeeeiiees ef $222? or fee? are {e be eeegeiiéeéeé an?»
`
`zzéa’es‘ge ea???
`
`éeeweeieeée eééee {e a eeegieeééeé egg???
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Misdin {Tails-r, lfié Aile {$733, 549 N.Y.S.2d L341 {2d Dept, 2989,}; Lem: Island i3<3m Com. V.
`
`Shaifiw Mcial Siamginfi CG.. 1329.,
`
`l 33 Afijé $89, 4?}? l‘iYSQé ?§’l (Ed 1kg?” $385),
`
`Haas, 1113:? are 90111131011 questioas of law and fafii. The trial 0513:0131 C3883 Wili {equi'z‘s tesiimgny
`
`by {he Same wimssses, pragmatic}:
`
`{he 53:31:: evidence and an evaiuaiien by the jury 9f the
`
`32:11:33 set efcircumstaaces and operative facis.
`
`’l‘izemfisre, “Lhasa (321863 should be causalida‘ted f0!“
`
`the purpeses of jeint digmvery and joint trial 3:0 pzevent the defendants from defz‘nding this
`
`matter in mere than 0136 trial Fufihérmore; causalidation of these mama‘s will Obviously prevent
`
`a waste ijudicial {ime and regmfi‘ces.
`
`THE COURT SHOULD VACATE PLAINTIFF’S NGTE OF ISSUE
`
`ii.
`
`Plaintiff prematurely filed their mete 0f issue in this matter and 1h? Com“: shauld
`
`vacate the note of issue and strike Action N0.
`
`i erm ihfi trial calendaiu Thais is Vital discevery
`
`that r€mains outg’ianding. Further, depositiong 0f the new defendants must be taken in order “to
`
`dciermine which déi‘endant is: responSible for the subjact arfia where plaintiff alleges that her
`
`accident tool: place. Courtg have held :hat a Caiificate of Rsadincss is premature Where a
`
`
`
`necessary pres-trial {:xamina’tian has moi been l1€ld. Eugene B. Irish Cansti’ugtign Corp,
`
`Standard Vending C032,, 47 A.D.3d 706, 365 N.Y.S.2d 294 {4th Dept. 1975}; Buabv Excavatggl
`
`filigmguliana, 4i} Allld 3624, 338 NETSZQ 983 {2nd Dept. 3973}; Baneiéa agtjiggg’gga 3'5
`
`Aiiffid 96?, 33’? liséfi’iSQd 818 {2nd 338;}:
`
`l9?{}§; Del 3935836: v. lifi‘p‘sfiflSinfi,
`
`
`31mg: 3‘ 2937:?
`
`
`a: 2%, {3;}; 8 {3. {73, EX. {3%}: {bag
`
`
`Yesé; finiégucs {T'siéisa N‘fjjq B86. 2‘ $5274 3%
`
`2, a}? 3
`
`{71?
`
`{33¢}:
`
`Kai
`
`k’iéga. 3233.. 253 NEVSQQ Egg {8,
`
`Sizfi’iiaiig {7%}?
`
`3m;
`
`2"
`
`Mining; dasé‘gnilafié agknawicéggs Elam Elvis; 133333382”:
`
`i3 biting made gags;ng {if 237:1:
`
`{395$ :fzségziés'génstm 3:15;}: 2: Eé‘iééiliéfi
`
`{<12 Vafiéilif 3:43 :ééaéc wifiiifl 3%,?! dayg Of Elia:
`
`iiéézig <3?
`
`335%: a}?
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`igsoc. Erioweveri a moiioo io vaceie the mole of lesue aod eefiificeie ofieaclioess made more {loan
`
`21‘} clays after {he filing; will be gamed in certain ciicomsiaoces. The moving: ooze}? moot some
`
`that {here is; a material fee: in ihe ceriificate of reedioees which is incorrect or oooo good cause
`
`showe. Torreg e. Selim: Vincent’s Coiholie Eviedicai Centere, ’fl ABSd 8’13 {2% eri. 2&0). To
`
`satisfy the requiremen‘i of “good cause,” {he party seeking vecaiur most demooso‘aie dial unusual
`
`or ooaoiicipeted circumstances developed SobSeqoen: to the filing of the note of issue ano
`
`certiiicaie of readinees requiring addiiiooal pretrial proceedings to prevent substantial prejudice.
`
`l3.
`
`Certainly both of these fequiremen‘is have been met in {he ioetaot mailer. First,
`
`there is a material fact contained in the certificate of readiness which is incorrectw namely that
`
`physical examinations are compleied.
`
`To defendants" knowledge,
`
`the previously noticed
`
`physical exam is not completed. Secondly, good cause has been shown to vacate the note of
`
`issue and certificate of readinees in that a second companion acriion was commenced following
`
`the filing of plaintiff’s note of issue in action number one. Both actions arise out of the same
`
`transaction and occurrence and as such discovery in both magi be completed. Oiherwige, all
`
`defendants would be severely orejodiced. Upon inloimation and oeliefi the named defendants in
`
`eciion number two are the oxmers of the property where :olaintiff has alleged that her inciden:
`
`took olace.
`
`such, the moving ciefiemieot would like lo preserve ifs time to file a Sommaey
`
`judgmeo: moiion once the depositioog ofCapoelli mid Cez'uzzi are coi‘iipleZecl.
`
`iii.
`
`Ailhoogizi
`
`lee lime iimi: whici‘a a pafiy
`
`lo comoleie all preliminary
`
`p’s‘oceeéiogfis oeiitee
`
`e Nole o? iseue em: {Teriéiicele of” fieeéioeee i3 propezg i3 meg; ool
`
`imoogecl
`
`
`{lee ooiialemi eciioo oi‘lhc coke? eioe. Folk 2'. Kali, Segre; see elgo,
`
`Eowo
`
`Placid; seem. gather Elie gaff}? Seek‘ieg discovez‘y mos: have 3 reegooelfic :imc to {lo
`
`:‘easooabieoees :‘iepeoéieg {goon all Elie ciz‘cooisiooccg lo Elle
`
`32 E’Q.'Y.€:7féii§é éoééfi; Logos”:
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`V. Sefieline, 2E 63$; 26; ’383, 295 MYSBS £323 {8. CE, Kings {City $93636}. Applymg {haw mks:3
`
`ii} this Ensign: 3:31?ng plaifliifi‘canfim Cl?€£§¥§¥§ifii
`
`ilzig {5mm rule i3}? mistrial}; serving a Cfilf‘ilfii‘efiifi 0f
`
`Readinessl uniiaiérally clatamziaiag fixed all prefimiaasy pmceeéings have $36612 campieisd.
`
`i3,
`
`Plaimiff 033i}; recently brsughi: 3:: aciian agaifisi ihese additianal parties. Them
`
`$2.35 3356273 absfimely no discavery in 333 related mafia: i0 {132$ and the parties have n93: appearad
`
`for a depssitign, Clearly film: is significan: discevsry thai ranging Guigtanding in thess‘ rslaized
`
`11121361'5 .
`
`36.
`
`Finally, defendants $66k that the time it: file summary judgment madam be
`
`extended {0 a firms 3%: discevery is complete. Clearly? the depositions cf the addiiicnal
`
`defendants bear significance 0n rhe dsfendants in actioa l and thus digcovery must take plase 30
`
`that all 33311163 can make appropriate summary judgment maiiens.
`
`CONCLUSiON
`
`17.
`
`These related mattas should be causalidaied for all 13111330363 as they Larisa out of
`
`the same incidm: and concern similar questions 01‘ law and fact Congelidafion weuld save
`
`judigial resources and wguld be canvsenieni far all parties involved.
`
`18.
`
`‘il‘laimiff’s male 0? issue mug: b6 vacated and Actian N6.
`
`1 must be stricken {mm
`
`{he trial calendar as significant
`
`(1:151:0me mingling outstanding. This time t9 fil€
`
`summary
`
`jildgfilfi‘fii 3:930:33 (fail, parties; shitauld bf: axifinésé iii} ihé: {tamplfiiigg gfdismixer}:
`
`WIFEERESRERE,
`
`it £3 :‘gfipgallfiily z‘ezgzsegisfi
`
`€323:
`
`{22:3 {burl £33332: an 0166? cansaléé‘fiia M E
`(3”
`
`233692“: l‘éi‘z. 2 with fig-{€612 $36.
`
`E far all @330333, 'fggaiifig glaéfliiffg Siaiemmi {1:5 Rfigéinegg
`
`A6895; Na}, 2, Siféliéfig file Nag: e? E33336 if: liiiziiém $36.
`
`3
`
`g; I
`ézéwéir 9
`i
`O
`
`aciis‘m Sale.
`
`l fwm i336 filial
`
`{33382162}? 0:“
`
`‘35: {38:56 {123:3} bemg
`
`iheméza amél eemgfiiancés with Ehe miles: 0%”
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`caicndaz‘ pmfifim {31“ this {302111, 33 W811 axtendéfig all parties £51336 TS fik: a Sfiazmaz‘y judgmam
`
`matigfi 3m; granting 3128}: 01319:” ané fufiher‘ reiigf a3 {a 132:3 Com”: may $6613} 333% and grape:
`
`under tha cirmmsizmses.
`
`Daifid: E‘w’s’w Yai‘k, Naw Yfii‘k
`312%}; ‘24, 2812
`
`EDWKH
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`SUPREME COURT ognggzram OF NEW YORK
`COUNTY OF WESTC
`s
`I
`_A.“X
`""""""""""""
`ELAINE HUDSOa
`
`1 5 3 5 3 to
`Index NO“:
`Date Purchased:
`SUMMONS
`
`JUN 1 6
`
`2mg
`
`P ' err
`1mm (3}
`
`,
`
`-
`
`1;.
`
`.
`agams
`CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE, COUNTY OE
`WESTCHESTER, GEORGE A. FULLER COMPANY,
`INC, TRUMP PLAZA NEW ROCHELLE
`CONDOMINIUM AND UNITED WATER NEW
`R CHE L IN
`
`O
`
`L E E
`
`Defendant(s).
`
`.
`.
`.
`Platottffdesrgnates
`Westohester County as the
`place oftrial.
`,
`.
`Th b .
`f
`‘3 as” ‘3’ Venn“: 15'
`Place of Women“
`P1 , {Themes at
`30G Gramatan Avenue, Apt
`vemon,
`
`3111 l
`
`1
`
`1
`
`___________________________________________________________________“X County of Westchester
`
`To the above named Defendants:
`
`You are hereby summoned to answer the complaint in this action, and to serve a copy
`ofyour answer, or, ifthe complaint is not served with this summons, to serve a notice ofappearance
`on the Plaintiffs attorneys within twenty days after the service ofthis summons, exclusive ofthe day
`ofservice, Where service is made by delivery upon you 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, NY
`June 3, 2010
`
`Defendant(s) Address:
`
`See attached Rider:
`
`Segai & Lax, LLP
`Attorneys for Plaintiffls}
`ELANE HUDSON
`
`Sfii Fifth Avenue, Suite 2064
`New York, NY 3001’?
`32,922,889}
`
`Our File No, {39-3265
`
`5, z 8
`[ff/fl
`4% meow , .wflsa ii“ ‘/*€Véw§(iiusywwrri
`'r
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`RIDER:
`
`CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE
`
`New Rechefie Law Department
`515 North Avenue
`
`New Rocheile, NY 10801
`
`COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
`
`Municipal BuiIding
`148 Martine Avenue, 6th Floor
`White Plains, New York 10601
`
`GEORGE A. FULLER COMPANY, INC.
`33 Lecount Place
`
`New Rochefle, NY 10801
`
`TRUMP PLAZA NEW ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM
`175 Huguenot Street
`New Rechefie, NY 10801
`
`UNITED WATER NEW ROCHELLE INC.
`2525 Palmer Avenue
`
`New Rochelle, NY 10801
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`
`COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
`--------------------------------------------------------------------«X
`ELAINE HUDSON
`
`i g 3 5 3/»,0
`Index No;
`Date Purchased:
`JUN I 6 2010
`VERIFIED COMPLAINT
`
`I
`
`Piaintiffls),
`
`against
`
`CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE, COUNTY OF
`WESTCHESTER, GEORGE A. FULLER COMPANY,
`INC, TRUMP PLAZA NEW ROCHELLE
`CONDOMINIUM AND UNITED WATER NEW
`ROCHELLE INC.
`
`---------------------------5—-—-~——-—-—-----———~-—------~-—-~~~-—-«-X
`
`Defendant(s).
`
`Plaintiff, by her attorneys, SEGAL & LAX, LLP, complaining of the Defendants
`
`respectfully alleges, upon information and belief:
`
`That at the time ofthe commencement ofthis action, PlaintiffELAINE HUDSON,
`I.
`resided in the County of Westehester, State of New York.
`
`That the cause ofaction alleged herein arose in the County of Westehester, City of
`2.
`New Roeheile and State of New York.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`That this action fails within one or more ofthe exceptions set forth in CPLR £51602
`
`That on June 1, 2099, and a: all times herein mentioned, Defendant CITY OF NEW
`
`ROCHELLE was, and stiil is, a mnnieipai corporation,
`
`5.
`
`That on June 1, 2009, and ai ali times herein mentioned, Defendant COUNTY OF
`
`WESTCHESTER was, and still is, a municipal corporation,
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`That prior hereto on July 14, 2009, and Within the time prescribed by law, a sworn
`6.
`Notice of Claim stating, among other things, the time when and piaee where the injuries and
`damages were sustained, together with Piaintifi’s demands foradjustment thereofwas duiy servedon
`
`this action was commenced.
`
`That on January 6, 2010, plaintifftestified at a hearingpursuant to General Municipal
`7.
`Law Section 50(h).
`
`That this action is being commenced within one yearand ninew days after accrual of
`8.
`this cause ofaction, or within the time allowed by law.
`
`Virtue of the Iaws of the State ofNew York.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned: the Defendant GEORGE A. FULLER
`10.
`COMPANY, INC. was and stii} is a foreign corporation duly organized and existing under and by
`Virtue of the laws of the State of New York.
`
`That at ah times hereinafter mentioned} the Defendant GEORGE A. FULLER
`It.
`COMPANY, INC maintained its prineipai place ofhusiness in the County ofWestehester, State of
`
`New York.
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`12.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM was and stiii is a domestic corporation duly organized and
`
`existing under and by Virtue of the iaws of the State of New York.
`
`13.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM was and still is a foreign corporation duly authorized to do
`
`business in the State ofNew York.
`
`14.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM maintained its principal place of business in the County of
`
`Westchester, State ofNeW York.
`
`15.
`
`That at ail times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant UNITED WATER NEW
`
`ROCHELLE INC. was and still is a domestic corporation duly organized and existing under and by
`
`Virtue of the laws of the State of New York.
`
`16.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant UNITED WATER NEW
`
`ROCHELLE INC. was and still is a foreign corporation duly authorized to do business in the State
`
`of New York.
`
`17.
`
`That at ail times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant UNITED WATER NEW
`
`ROCHELLE INC. maintained its principai piaee ofbusiness in the County ofWestchester, State of
`
`New York.
`
`i&
`
`That on Time i} 2%9, and at aii times herein mentioned} a premises existed in the
`
`County of Westehester, City of New Roeheiie and State of New York with the address of 175
`
`Huguenot Street:
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`39.
`
`That on Jane 1, 2009, and at at} times herein mentioned, the aforesaid premises were
`
`owned by Defendant CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE.
`
`20.
`
`That on June 1, 2009, and at aii times herein mentioned, the aforesaid premises were
`
`operated and managed by Defendant CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE.
`
`21.
`
`That on June 1, 2009, and at ah times herein mentioned, the aforesaid premises were
`
`maintained by Defendant CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE.
`
`22.
`
`That on June 1, 2009, and at all times herein mentioned, the aforesaid premises were
`
`owned by Defendant COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER.
`
`23.
`
`That on June 1, 2009, and at all times herein mentioned, the aforesaid premises were
`
`operated and managed by Defendant COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER.
`
`24.
`
`That on June 1, 2009, and at all times herein mentiOned, the aforesaid premises were
`
`maintained by Defendant COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER.
`
`25.
`
`That on June 1, 2009, and at all times herein mentioned, it was the duty ofDefendants
`
`CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE and COUNTY OF ‘WESTCHESTER to maintain the premises at
`175 Huguenot Street, in the County of Westchester, State of New York, in a reasonably safe
`
`condition.
`
`26.
`That at ah times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM owned the premises and appurtenances and fixtures thereto,
`ioeated at £23 Huguenot Street, in the County of Westehester, State ofNew York,
`
`27.
`
`That at aii times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM operated the aforesaid premises.
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`28.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM managed the aforesaid premises.
`
`229.
`
`That at ail times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM oontroiied the aforesaid premises.
`
`30.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM maintained the aforesaid premises.
`
`31.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM repaired the aforesaid premises.
`
`32.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant GEORGE A. FULLER
`
`COMPANY, INC. repaired the premises located at 175 Huguenot Street,
`
`in the County of
`
`Westchester, State of New York.
`
`33.
`
`That at ail times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant GEORGE A. FULLER
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant UNITED WATER NEW
`
`ROCHELLE INC. repaired the premises located at 175 Huguenot Street,
`
`in the County of
`
`Westehester, State of New York.
`
`35.
`
`That at all times hereinafter mentioned, the Defendant UNITED WATER NEW
`
`ROCHELLE INC. was the construction general manager at the aforesaid premises.
`
`36.
`
`On done i, 2009 Piaintiff ELAINE HUDSON was iawfuiiy on the aforesaid
`
`premises.
`
`3?.
`
`That on June l, 2009, white Plaintiffwas lawfully at the aforesaid location, Plaintiff
`
`was caused to siip and/or trip and fali and sustain severe and permanent injuries.
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`38.
`
`The above mentioned occurrence and the resuits thereof, were caused by the
`
`negiigence ofthe Defendants and/or said Defendant’s agents, servants, empioyees andz‘or licensees in
`
`the ownership, operation, management, maintenance and control ofthe aforesaid premises.
`
`39.
`
`That, upon information and belief, Defendants had actuai notice of this defective
`
`condition for at ieast fifteen (15) days prior to June 1, 2009.
`
`40.
`
`That no negligence on the part of the Plaintiffcontributed to the occurrence alleged
`
`herein in any manner whatsoever.
`
`4 i.
`
`That because ofthe above stated premises, PlaintiffELAINE HUDSON was caused
`
`to sustain serious injuries and to have suffered pain, shock and mental anguish; that these injuries
`
`and their effects will be permanent; and as a result ofsaid injuries Plaintiffhas been caused to incur,
`
`and will continue to incur, expenses for medical care and attention; and, as a further result, Plaintiff
`
`was, and will continue to be, rendered unable to perform Plaintiffs normal activities and duties and
`
`has sustained a resultant loss therefrom.
`
`42.
`
`That by reason of the foregoing, PlaintiffELAINE HUDSON was damaged in a
`
`sum which exceeds the jurisdictional limits of aii lower courts which would otherwise have
`
`jurisdiction.
`
`WHEREFORE, Piaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants herein, in a sum
`
`exceeding the jurisdictionai limits of aii tower courts which wouid otherwise have jurisdiction,
`together with the costs and disbursements of this action.
`
`Dated: New York, NY
`June 3, 2010
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
` EMIL LAX
`Segal & Lax, LLP
`Attorneys for Piainfiffis)
`ELAINE HUDSON
`
`501 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2004
`
`New York, NY 16017
`212.922.0891
`
`Our File No. 09-3265
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`ATTORNEYS VERIFICATION
`
`EMIL LAX, an anomey duly admitted to practice before the Courts of the State ofNew
`
`York, affirms the following to be true under the penalties of perjury: lain an attorney at SEGAL
`
`& LAX, LLP, attorneys of record for Plaintiff, Elaine Hudson, 1 have read the annexed
`
`COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof, and the same are true to my knowledge, except
`
`those matters therein which are stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those
`
`matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon
`
`knowledge, is based upon facts, records, and other pertinent information contained in my files.
`
`This verification is made by me because Plaintiff is not presently in the county wherein I
`
`maintain my offices.
`
`DATED:
`
`New York, NY
`June 3, 2010
`
`/
`
`A
`
`
`
`/EMILLAX %
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Index No.
`
`SU?REME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
`
`ELAINE HUDSON
`
`Plaintiffis),
`
`-against~
`
`CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE, COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER,
`GEORGE A. FULLER COMPANY, INC, TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`ROCHELLE CONDOMINIUM AND UNITED WATER NEW ROCHELLE INC.
`
`Defendant{s).
`
`SUMMONS AND VERIFiED COMPLAINT
`
`SEGAL & LAX, LLP
`Attorneysfor Plaintzflcfis)
`501 Fifth Avenue
`New York NY 10017
`212.922.0891
` To:
`
`Attorney<si
`
`for
`
` Service of a
`copy of the within
`is hereby admitted.
`
`Dated:
`
`Attorney(s)
`for
`
`NOTICE
`NOTICE OF
`
`PLEASE TAKE
`
`ENZWEY
`y--j
`1
`L..._J
`
`NOTICHZ
`OF
`SET?1£EfiSNT
`F‘“‘7
`}
`La}
`
`that tee within is a icertified) true copy of a
`entered in the office 0f the Clerk of the within named
`Court on
`19
`
`that an Order of which the within is a true copy will be
`presented to the Han.
`, one of the
`judgee of the within aameé Court! at 111 Sr; fiartin Luther King Bouievard,
`' Q“
`2529! a:
`
`a.
`
`Bates: June 3, 2G18
`
`omeys for Péaietiffs’s}
`Fifth Avenae
`w York, NY 28627
`
`

`

`
`
`
`and “25”
`
`Denies each and every aii
`egafim scammed 2‘53 paragraphs numbered
`of1:323 Campiaini herein and respectfifliy refers a5
`2 questions of}
`Admits each and every 3}?
`w?” ofthe Compiaim herein.
`
`aw 1:0 {his Honorabi 6 Court
`egation contained in paragraphs numbered “4”, “Q”J and
`
`3.
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`4i
`
`Denies each and every all
`
`egation contained in paragraph numbered “6” ofthe
`Complaint herein except admits that on June l4, 20093 a sworn N
`the plaintiff’s behalfon the City ofNew Rochell
`
`otice of Claim was served on
`
`e and respectfully refers all questions oflaw to
`
`this Honorable Court.
`
`Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a beliefas to each and every
`5.
`allegation contained in paragraph numbered “8”
`ofthe Complaint herein and respectqu
`all
`
`y refers
`
`questions oflaw to this Honorable Court.
`
`Denies each and every allegation contained in paragraphs “19”, “20”, “21”, “37”,
`6.
`“38”, “39”, “40”, “41” and “42” ofthe Complaint herein.
`
`Whatever damages-and/or injuries the plaintiffmay have sustained at the time and
`7‘
`place alleged in the Complaint was caused, in whol
`e or in part, by the culpable conduct of
`plaintiff, ELAINE HUDSON. The amount ofdamages recovered, ifany, shall therefore be
`diminished in the proportion to which the cal
`
`pable conduct attributabl
`
`e to plaintiff bears to the
`
`culpable conduct which caused the damages.
`
`
`This answering defendant, ClTY OF AEW ROCEELLE} has no liability to
`8,
`plaintiffby reason ofplaintiffhaving undertaking conduct such as to have assumed the risk ofall
`ofthe damages andz‘or injuries alleged in the Complaint.
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`11.
`
`N
`
`'
`
`S AND FOR A FIFTH AFFHUVIATIVE DEFENSE
`’
`’
`
`accordance with City Chamer Artici
`
`8 X112 section 327,4” Accerdingiy, the CITY OF NEW
`ifabie for any injuries {waking 513m such éefeciive conditioa, if
`
`New Rocheile is net EéabEe to piaintififs under City Code Section 197;
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`piece of land or any part the:
`
`eofWithin the City ofNew Rochelle shall fail to maintain the
`sidewalks and curbs adjoining his or heri
`
`persons injured as a result of such fail
`
`0t or piece ofland, said owner shaii be liable to any
`are and the City ofNew Rochelle shall not be liable
`
`have been sustained by reason ofthe negligence, culpable conduct and/or breach of
`contract ofeach party against whom a claim is being asserted, and ifa
`
`each party named in this cross-claim, based upon said
`party’s negligence, culpable conduct and /or breach ofcontract.
`WHEREFORE, each answering defendant demands judgment:
`(1)
`Dismissng the complaint;
`
`(2)
`
`U)(i
`
`For contribution and/or indemnification on the cross
`C0~Defendant as named above;
`
`and
`
`claim against
`
`For cost and disbursements against adverse parties
`
`Dated: White Plains, New York
`July 8; 2030
`
`OFFICEOFTHECGRPWTIONCOUNSEL
`
`
`a. PbWERS
`Attorneys for Defendant
`CITY OF NEW ROCHELLE
`SlS North Avenue
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`TO:
`
`SEGAL & LAX, 'LLP
`Attorneys for Piaintiff
`501 Fifi}; Avenue Suite 2004
`New York, New York 10017
`(212) 922-0891
`
`WESTCEHSSTER CONN I Y ATTORNEYS OFFICE
`Attorneys fer Defendant
`COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
`148 Martinez Avenue -
`White Plains, Ne
`(914) 995-2660
`
`GEORGE A. FULLER COMPANY, INC.
`33 Lecount Place
`'
`New Rochelle, New York 10801
`TRUMP PLAZA NEW ROCHELLE CONDMNIUM
`175 Huguenot Street
`New Rochelle, New York 10801
`
`UNITED WATER NE
`W ROCHELLE INC.
`2525 Palmer Avenue
`New Rochelle, New York 10801
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
`
`)
`
`ss:
`
`That he has read the annexed Verified Answer and knows the contents thereofand that
`the same is true to his own know}
`
`‘
`
`ipa} corporations
`
`1e in the City ofNeW Rochelle and conversations with officers and
`employees having knowiedge ofthe facts ofthis case in the City ofNew Rochefie.
`
`CHARLES STROME
`
`Swem to before me this
`git: day effiuiy: m
`
`
`
`
`
`V £2:
`?
`5: t? '
`,
`NOTARY PUBLIC
`
`Brian 3. Pewers
`Notary Pubiie, State ofNew York
`No. 01P0462D?21
`
`

`

`
`
`ClTY OF NEW ROCHELLE, COUNTY OF
`WESTCHESTER, GEORGE A. FULLER
`, COMPANY, lNC., TRUMP PLAZA NEW
`ROCHELLE CONDOMlNlUM AND UNITED
`WATER NEW ROCHELLE lNC.,
`
`Defendants.
`...................................................................--x
`
`Defendant, United Water New Rochelle inc.
`
`("UWNR") by its attorneys,
`
`BlVONA & COHEN, P.C., as and for
`
`its Verified Answer to plaintiff's Verified
`
`Complaint, alleges upon information and belief:
`
`i
`
`FlRST.
`
`Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a beiief as to
`
`each and every allegation of the paragraphs of the Verified Complaint designated “1 ”,
`
`"10“, "ll", "12”, "13”, “i4”, "18”, "1’9", "20",
`
`"21", "22", "23", "24", "25", "26”, "27", “28", "29", "30”, "31", "32", "33",
`
`“36” and "37”;
`
`SECOND.
`
`Denies each and every aliegation of the paragraph of the Verified
`
`Compiaént designated
`
`ana respectfuiiy refers ali questiens 01‘ law, fact andz’bi
`
`conclusions raised therein to the Triai Court.
`
`THlRD,
`
`Denies each and every allegation of the paragraph of the Verified
`
`Compiaint designated “16", "34", “35", "40", "4? ” and "42".
`
`
`
`
`
`Our File Number: UW/TlC 38~28975 lRGM/AS-fils
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`COUNTY OF WESTCHESt‘ER
`
`------------------------------------------+u~««uu«n«n«u~x
`ELAlNE HUDSON,
`
`Piaintiff,
`
`-against~
`
`index No.: 15353/10
`
`VERlFlED ANSWER TO
`VERlFlED COMPLAiNT
`
`

`

`
`
`FiFTl—l.
`if the injuries and damages were sustained by the plaintiff at the
`time and place and in the manner alleged in the Verified Complaint, such damages
`and iniu