AnswertoAmendedComplaint-3.docx

(Case 1:03-cv-03042-DCF Document 30 Filed 09/27/06 Page 1of 4)

(b.) (Marriott) (Worldwide Corporation) (("MW") is a Maryland)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

———————————————————————)(

GLENNA TOPPEL and ROBERT TOPPEL,

Civil Action No. 03-CV-3042

(DAB)

-against-

Plaintiffs,

ANSWER TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., MARRIOTT WORLDWIDE CORPORATION,

Defendants.

——————————————————————-)(

Defendants Marriott International, Inc., and Marriott Worldwide Corporation, by their attorneys Babchik & Young, LLP for their answer to the Seconded Amended Complaint herein:

1. Deny knowledge or information thereof sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any of the allegations contained in paragraph 1.

2. Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs 2 and 3 except admit:

a. Marriott International, Inc. ("MI") is a Delaware Corporation with a primary place of business in Bethesda, Maryland;

5. Deny knowledge or information thereof sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any of the allegations contained in paragraph 10.

TO THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

6. Admit or deny as above each and every allegation incorporated by reference in paragraph 11.

7. Deny knowledge or information thereof sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any of the allegations contained in paragraphs 12 and 13.

8. Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22.

TO THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

9. Admit or deny as above each and every allegation incorporated by reference in paragraph 23.

10. Deny knowledge or information thereof sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any of the allegations contained in paragraph 24

11. Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs 25 and 26.

AS A THIRD DEFENSE

14. The Court lacks jurisdiction over these defendants.

AS A FOURTH DEFENSE

15.The proper venue for this action with proper party defendant(s) is in the

Bahamas.

AS A FIFTH DEFENSE

16. If the plaintiffs were injured or damaged as alleged in the complaint, such injury or damage was caused, in whole or in part, or was contributed to, by reason of the carelessness, negligence, want of care, breach of contract and/or culpable conduct on the part of the plaintiffs without any carelessness, negligence, want of care, breach of contract and/or culpable conduct on the part of the defendants contributing thereto; and if the carelessness, negligence, want of care, breach of contract and/or culpable conduct other than that of the plaintiffs caused or contributed to such alleged injury or damage, it

(was the carelessness, negligence, want of care, breach of contract and/or culpable)

AS A SIXTH DEFENSE

17. There is no nexus between the Southern District ofNew York and any of the parties to this action.

AS A SEV ENTH DEFENSE

18. Defendants did not own, operate or maintain the hotel wherein the incident allegedly occurred.

AS AN EIGHTH DEFENSE

19. Defendants had no control of Ruffin's Crystal Palace Hotel Corporation

Limited ("RCPH") placement of signs near RCPH's restaurant.

AS A NINTH DEFENSE

20.The action against MW is barred by the statute of limitations.

WHEREFORE, defendants demand judgment dismissing the action against them together with the costs, disbursements and attorneys' fees of this action.