Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2017 Carolina Gildred V Michael Foster NOTICE of MOTION 15

    Uploaded by

    Mic Fos
    26 views3 pages
    Colliers Int'l NY LLC v. DDG Partners, LLC - Casetext case Supreme Ct. › 2022 › March LOUIS L. NOCK Justice. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION. Louis L. Nock Judge. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number

    Original Title

    153554 2017 Carolina Gildred v Michael Foster NOTICE of MOTION 15

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Colliers Int'l NY LLC v. DDG Partners, LLC - Casetext case Supreme Ct. › 2022 › March LOUIS L. NOCK Justice. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION. Louis L. Nock Judge. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    26 views3 pages

    2017 Carolina Gildred V Michael Foster NOTICE of MOTION 15

    Uploaded by

    Mic Fos
    Colliers Int'l NY LLC v. DDG Partners, LLC - Casetext case Supreme Ct. › 2022 › March LOUIS L. NOCK Justice. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION. Louis L. Nock Judge. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/09/2017 01:16 PM INDEX NO.

    153554/2017
    NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2017

    SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK


    COUNTY OF NEW YORK

    -------------------------------------- X
    CAROLINA GILDRED, an individual, :
    INDEX No. 153554/2017
    Plaintiff, : Hon. Gerald Lebovits

    vs. :
    CORRECTED NOTICE OF MOTION TO
    MICHAEL D. FOSTER (aka DARREN M. : DISMISS VERIFIED ANSWER,
    FOSTER, an individual, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND
    : COUNTERCLAIMS; MOTION TO
    Defendant. DISMISS COUNTERCLAIMS; AND, IN
    THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO
    CORRECT PLEADINGS

    -------------------------------------- X

    PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that on June 27, 2017 at 9:30 a.m. at the Motion Submission

    Part at 60 Centre Street, Room 130, New York, NY 10007, Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter

    will and hereby does move the Court to dismiss Defendant’s amended “Verified Answer,

    Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims” on the following grounds.

    I. The entire pleading should be dismissed for failure to comply with CPLR 3014 which

    requires "plain and concise statements," and that each paragraph be “consecutively

    numbered” and contain "as far as practicable, a single allegation”;

    II. The entire pleading should be dismissed for failure to comply with CPLR 3013, which

    requires "[s]tatements . . . be sufficiently particular to give the court and parties notice

    of the transactions, occurrences, or series of transactions or occurrences, intended to be

    proved and the material elements of each cause of action or defense."

    III. The entire pleading should be dismissed pursuant to CPLR 2101(a) for failure of

    Defendant’s attorney of record to sign the pleading;

    1 of 3
    FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/09/2017 01:16 PM INDEX NO. 153554/2017
    NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2017

    IV. All of the counterclaims should be dismissed pursuant to C.P.L.R. 3211(a)(7) because

    each counterclaim fails to state a claim.

    V. Defendant’s second counterclaim should be dismissed pursuant to CPLR 3016(b)

    because Defendant fails to state a fraud claim with particularity

    Alternatively, if the Court denies the motion to dismiss, Plaintiff moves this Court for a

    Motion to Correct Pleadings pursuant to CPLR 3024(a). Defendant’s Verified Answer,

    Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims is “so vague or ambiguous that [Plaintiff] cannot

    reasonably be required to frame a response.” Further, Defendant’s Verified Answer, Affirmative

    Defenses and Counterclaims is not accompanied by the affidavit required pursuant to CPLR 3021,

    is not a “verified” pleading within the meaning of the CPLR, and should not be construed as such,

    requiring subsequent pleadings to be verified.

    This motion is based upon this Notice of Motion, the accompanying Memorandum of Law, the

    Affirmation of Seth A. Rafkin and exhibits thereto, and upon all the prior pleadings and proceedings

    in this action.

    The return date requested on the Motion is June 27, 2017 at 9:30 a.m. Pursuant to CPLR

    2214(b), answering affidavits, if any, are required to be served upon the undersigned at least seven

    days before the return date of this motion

    -2-
    2 of 3
    FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/09/2017 01:16 PM INDEX NO. 153554/2017
    NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2017

    Executed at Randolph, New Jersey


    Dated: June 12, 2017 RAFKIN ESQ.
    1201 SUSSEX TURNPIKE, SUITE 102
    RANDOLPH, NJ 07869
    (973) 891-3370

    By:
    Seth A. Rafkin

    Attorneys for Plaintiff

    -3-
    3 of 3

    You might also like