Case 1:11-cv-01786-KAM-JO Document 4 Filed 07/05/11 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 29

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------------- x
TZVI HASENFELD,
Plaintiff,

ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS
COMPLAINT ON BEHALF
OF DEFENDANT CITY OF
NEW YORK

-AGAINST11-CV-1786 (KAM)(JO)
CITY OF NEW YORK AND POLICE OFFICERS A, B,
AND C,

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Defendants.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- x
Defendant, City of New York (City), by its attorney, Michael A. Cardozo,
Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, for its answer to the plaintiffs complaint,
respectfully alleges, upon information and belief, as follows:
1.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 1 of the complaint.

2.

Admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 2 of the complaint.

3.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 3 of the complaint.

4.

The allegations set forth in paragraph 4 of the complaint do not

constitute averments of fact and as such no response is required.

5.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 5 of the complaint, except

admits that plaintiff purports to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court as stated therein.
6.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 6 of the complaint.

Case 1:11-cv-01786-KAM-JO Document 4 Filed 07/05/11 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 30

7.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 7 of the complaint, except

admits that plaintiff purports to base venue as stated therein.

8.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 8 of the complaint.

9.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 9 of the complaint.

10.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 10 of the complaint.

11.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 11 of the complaint.

12.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 12 of the complaint.

13.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 13 of the complaint.

14.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 14 of the complaint.

15.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 15 of the complaint, except

admits that plaintiff drove to his home.

16.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 16 of the complaint.

17.

Admit the allegations set forth in paragraph 17 of the complaint.

18.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 18 of the complaint.

19.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 19 of the complaint.

20.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 20 of the complaint.

21.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 21 of the complaint.

22.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 22 of the complaint, except

admits that plaintiff was handcuffed.

-2-

Case 1:11-cv-01786-KAM-JO Document 4 Filed 07/05/11 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 31

23.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 23 of the complaint, except

admits that plaintiff was taken to the 66th Precinct and placed into a holding cell.
24.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 24 of the complaint, except

denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief regarding what plaintiffs wife, four
minor children, and unidentified passersby witnessed.
25.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 25 of the complaint.

26.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 26 of the complaint.

27.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 27 of the complaint.

28.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 28 of the complaint, except

admits that plaintiff was released and issued three summonses.

29.

Admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 29 of the complaint.

30.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 30 of the complaint.

31.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 31 of the complaint.

32.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 32 of the complaint.

33.

Admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 33 of the complaint.

34.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 34 of the complaint, except admits that plaintiff
purports to have filed a request pursuant to N.Y.C.P.L. 100.25.
35.

Admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 35 of the complaint.

-3-

Case 1:11-cv-01786-KAM-JO Document 4 Filed 07/05/11 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 32

36.

Denies knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 36 of the complaint, except admits that the
charges against plaintiff were dismissed.
37.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 37 of the complaint.

38.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 38 of the complaint, except

states that allegations concerning color of law constitute legal conclusions to which no response
is required.
39.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 39 of the complaint and all

40.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 40 of the complaint, except

of its subparts.

admits that plaintiff filed a document purporting to be a notice of claim, appeared for an
examination pursuant to N.Y.G.M.L. 50-h, and returned a signed and notarized transcript of
same.
41.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 41 of the complaint.

42.

Denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 42 of the complaint.

AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:

43.

The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:

44.

Defendant City has not violated any rights, privileges or immunities under

the Constitution or laws of the United States or the State of New York or any political
subdivision thereof, or any act of Congress providing for the protection of civil rights.
AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:
45.

Any injury alleged to have been sustained resulted from plaintiffs own

-4-

Case 1:11-cv-01786-KAM-JO Document 4 Filed 07/05/11 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 33

culpable or negligent conduct or the culpable or negligent conduct of non-parties or third parties,
and was not the proximate result of any act of defendant City.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:
46.

At all times relevant to the incident, defendant City of New York and its

employees and officials acted reasonably and in the proper and lawful exercise of their
discretion. As such, defendant City is entitled to governmental immunity.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:
47.

Plaintiff provoked any incident.

AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:

48.

There was probable cause for plaintiffs detention and any subsequent

arrest or prosecution.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:
49.

Punitive damages are not recoverable against the City of New York.

AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:

50.

Plaintiff may have failed to comply with conditions precedent to suit.

-5-

Case 1:11-cv-01786-KAM-JO Document 4 Filed 07/05/11 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 34

WHEREFORE, defendant City of New York requests judgment dismissing the

Complaint in its entirety, together with the costs and disbursements of this action, and such other
and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Dated:

New York, New York

July 5, 2011
Michael A. Cardozo
Corporation Counsel of the City of New York
Attorney for Defendant City
100 Church Street Rm. 3-214
New York, NY 10007

By:

To:

Mr. Marshall C. Berger (By ECF)

Attorney for Plaintiff
111 West 57th Street, Suite 410
New York, New York 10019

-6-

/s/
Ryan G. Shaffer
Assistant Corporation Counsel

Case 1:11-cv-01786-KAM-JO Document 4 Filed 07/05/11 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 35

11 Civ. 1786 (KAM)(JO)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
TZVI HASENFELD,
PLAINTIFF,
-AGAINSTCITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT ON

BEHALF OF DEFENDANT CITY OF NEW
YORK
MICHAEL A. CARDOZO

Corporation Counsel of the City of New York

Attorney for Defendants
100 Church Street
New York, N.Y. 10007
Of Counsel: Ryan G. Shaffer
Tel: (212) 788-1041
NYCLIS No. 2010-011317
Due and timely service is hereby admitted.
New York, N.Y. ........................................... ,2011
....................................................................... Esq.
Attorney for ..........................................................