Vizcarrondo Rios Vs NYC Dept of Education

FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 05/28/2019 12:20 PM INDEX NO.
26228/2019E
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/28/2019
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF BRONX Date Filed: May 28, 2019
--------------------------------------------------------X
HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO, Index No.:
individually and as Administrators to the
estate of minor M.A.V-R., deceased
Plaintiffs, SUMMONS
-against- Plaintiff designates

Bronx County as the place
of trial.
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK

CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, JOHN The basis of venue is
OR JANE DOES (1-10) Plaintiff’s residence
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------X
TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS:
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy
of your Answer, or if the complaint is not served with the summons, to serve a notice of appearance
on plaintiff’s attorney within twenty (20) days after service of this summons, exclusive of the day
of service, (or within thirty (30) days after service is complete, if this summons is not personally
delivered to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to answer, judgment
will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded hereto.
Dated: New York, New York

May 27, 2019 Yours, etc.
___________/s/______________
John Scola
The Law Office of John A. Scola, PLLC
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs
30 Broad Street, Suite 1424
New York, New York 10004
(917) 423-1445
1 of 26
FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 05/28/2019 12:20 PM INDEX NO. 26228/2019E
DEFENDANTS ADDRESS:
CITY OF NEW YORK

Corporation Counsel of the City
Of New York
100 Church Street
New York, NY 10007
NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Tweed Courthouse
52 Chambers Street
New York, NY 10007
2 of 26
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF BRONX
--------------------------------------------------------X
HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO, Index No.:
individually and as Administrators to the
estate of minor M.A.V-R., deceased
Plaintiffs, VERIFIED COMPLAINT
-against-
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK

CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, JOHN
OR JANE DOES (1-10)
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------X
Plaintiffs, by their attorneys, Law Office of John A. Scola, PLLC, as and for a complaint herein,
respectfully sets forth and alleges as follows
1. That at all times herein, infant M.A.V-R., was a resident of the County of the Bronx,
City and State of the New York.
2. That at all times herein, HERIBERTO RIOS was and still is a resident of the County
of the Bronx, City and State of New York.
3. That at all times herein, NELLY VIZACARRONDO was and still is a resident of the
County of the Bronx, City and State of New York.
4. At all times mentioned, the CITY OF NEW YORK, was and is a municipal corporation
duly organized and existing by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.
5. That at all times herein the NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION is
a duly organized public health benefit educational corporation, existing under and by
the virtue of the laws of the State of New York.
3 of 26
6. That at all times hereinafter mentioned the NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, its agencies, bureaus, departments, agents, servants and/or employees
operated the public school known as Harry S. Truman High School located at 750
Baychester Avenue, Bronx, New York 10475 in the County of the Bronx, City and
State of New York.
owned the public school known as Harry S. Truman High School located at 750
State of New York.
managed the public school known as Harry S. Truman High School located at 750
State of New York.
controlled the public school known as Harry S. Truman High School located at 750
State of New York.
10. That at all times hereinafter mentioned, defendant NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION operated, maintained, managed and controlled
4 of 26
Harry S. Truman High School, pursuant to the laws of the State and City of New York
for the care and education of children,
11. On or about March 29, 2018 and within 90 days after the claim herein arose, the
plaintiff served a Notice of Claim in writing sworn to on their behalf upon the
defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and the NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, by delivering a copy thereof in duplicate to the officer designated to
receive such process personally, which Notice of Claim advised the Defendant City of
New York, of the nature, place, time and manner in which the claim arose, the items of
damage and injuries sustained so far as was then determinable.
12. At least thirty (30) days have elapsed since the service of the claim prior to the
commencement of this action and adjustment of payment thereof has been neglected or
refused, and this action has been commenced within one year and ninety (90) days after
the happening of the event upon which the claims are based.
13. Upon information and belief, the plaintiffs herein have complied with the request of
the municipal Defendants for an oral examination pursuant to Section 50-H of the
General Municipal Law and/or the Public Authorities Law and/or no such request was
made within the applicable period.
14. Upon information and belief, at all times mentioned, Defendants CITY OF NEW
YORK AND THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION employed
principal, Keri Alfano, guidance counselors (name unknown at this time), psychologist
(name unknown at this time), teachers (name unknown at this time), aides (name
unknown at this time), and/or the deans (name unknown at this time) (collectively
referred to as “employees”) at Harry S. Truman High School.
5 of 26
15. Upon information and belief, at all times mentioned, Defendant JOHN OR JANE
DOES 1-10 were and are employees of the NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION who worked at Harry S. Truman High School who at all times herein
were acting in such capacity as the agents, servants and employees of the Defendants
CITY OF NEW YORK and NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
16. That at all times herein the employees were and are employees and/or independent
contractors of the Defendants City of New York and THE NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, and at all times herein were acting in such capacity
as the agents, servants and employees of the Defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK
and NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
17. Plaintiff M.A.V-R. began attending Harry S. Truman High School on or about
September 2017.
18. Shortly after plaintiff M.A.V-R. began attending the Harry S. Truman High School,
she began suffering pervasive and obvious bullying from some of the students at the
school.
19. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had actual notice of the “bullying”
but failed to intervene.
20. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had constructive notice of the
“bullying,” in that it occurred openly over a period of five (5) months from September
2017 until her death on February 28, 2018 but failed to intervene.
21. Plaintiff M.A.V-R. while attending Harry S. Truman High School was repeatedly
“bullied” in that she was forced to suffer severe emotional distress due to the acts which
occurred on the grounds of Harry S. Truman High School.
6 of 26
“bullied” in that she was forced to suffer intimidation which occurred on the grounds
of Harry S. Truman High School.
23. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had actual notice of the intimidation
intimidation in that it was obvious and pervasive over a period of five (5) months but
failed to intervene.
25. M.A.V-R. while attending Harry S. Truman High School was repeatedly “bullied” in
that she was forced to suffer harassment which occurred on the grounds of Harry S.
Truman High School.
26. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had actual notice of the harassment
harassment in that it was obvious and pervasive over a period of five (5) months from
September 2017 until her death on February 28, 2018 but failed to intervene.
28. Despite being intimidated by the students of Harry S. Truman High School, the
employees had constructive notice of the harassment but failed to intervene.
“bullied” in that she was forced to suffer threats which occurred on the grounds of
Harry S. Truman High School.
30. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had actual notice of the threats
received by M.A.V-R. but failed to intervene.
7 of 26
31. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had constructive notice of the threats
received by M.A.V-R. in that they were obvious and pervasive over a period of five
(5) months from September 2017 until her death on February 28, 2018 but failed to
intervene.
forced to endure abusive verbal acts which occurred on the grounds of Harry S. Truman
High School.
33. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had actual notice of the abusive verbal
acts received by plaintiff M.A.V-R. but failed to intervene.
34. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had constructive notice of the abusive
verbal acts received by plaintiff M.A.V-R. in that they were obvious and pervasive over
a period of five (5) months from September 2017 until her death on February 28, 2018
forced to endure physical abuse, including but not limited to being forced to perform
sex acts on other students while at school, from the students which occurred on the
grounds of Harry S. Truman High School.
36. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had actual notice of the physical
abuse, including but not limited to being forced to perform sex acts on other students
while at school, received by plaintiff M.A.V-R. but failed to intervene.
37. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had constructive notice of the physical
abuse, including but not limited to being forced to perform sex acts on other students
while at school, received by plaintiff M.A.V-R. in that they were obvious and pervasive
8 of 26
over a period of five (5) months from September 2017 until her death on February 28,
2018 but failed to intervene.
38. The employees of Harry S. Truman on December 14, 2017 presented the risks of cyber
bullying and bullying in general to the students of Harry S. Truman High School,
including M.A.V-R.
39. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School were aware of the potential risks of
children being bullied and their potential consequences if they did not intervene to stop
and/or prevent said bullying but failed to do so anyway.
40. While attending Harry S. Truman High School plaintiff M.A.V-R. was tormented by
students including but not limited to minor student Viviana D. who regularly and
obviously body shamed plaintiff M.A.V-R.
41. While attending Harry S. Truman High School minor student Viviana D. would
regularly and obviously verbally assault plaintiff.
42. While attending Harry S. Truman High School minor student Viviana D. would
regularly and obviously physically assault plaintiff.
43. The bullying occurred frequently and should have been stopped and/or prevented by
the employees of Harry S. Truman High School.
44. As a result of the pervasive bullying received by plaintiff M.A.V-R. she began missing
school more regularly beginning in late 2017 to avoid the treatment she was receiving
at school.
45. Prior to late 2017, plaintiff M.A.V-R. had nearly perfect attendance but that changed
as a result of the bullying she was receiving from other students at school.
9 of 26
46. Plaintiff M.A.V-R. was an honor student while attending Harry S. Truman High
School.
47. Plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO had a meeting with the
guidance counselor of deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R. on January 24, 2018 regarding their
daughter’s attendance but the guidance counselor failed to inform the parents about the
bullying plaintiff M.A.V-R. was forced to endure.
48. At this meeting the principal Keri Alfano and the dean told Plaintiffs HERIBERTO
RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO that there was no way that their daughter plaintiff
M.A.V-R. would be able to skip school because they would require her to sign in at
every class due to the issues she was having with attendance.
49. On a separate occasion plaintiff M.A.V-R. met with the guidance counselor about the
bullying she was forced to endure.
50. The guidance counselor then told plaintiff M.A.V-R that she had to investigate and sent
M.A.V-R. back to class.
51. Upon information and belief, the guidance counselor never investigated the claims.
52. The guidance counselor failed to notify the plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY
VIZCARRONDO about the meeting.
53. On another occasion infant plaintiff M.A.V-R. met with the principal Keri Alfano
regarding the bullying she was forced to endure.
54. Again, plaintiff M.A.V-R. was ignored and simply sent back to class without any
intervention by the school.
55. The principal failed to notify deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R.’s parents plaintiffs
HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO about the meeting.
10 of 26
56. On February 27, 2018, the guidance counselor was informed by a friend of deceased
plaintiff M.A.V-R. that M.A.V-R. was having problems.
57. On February 27, 2018, the guidance counselor went to the deceased plaintiff M.A.V-
R. gym class to discuss personal issues with M.A.V-R.
58. During that conversation on February 27, 2018 the guidance counselor assessed
M.A.V-R. for any signs of physical or verbal abuse.
59. Following this conversation with M.A.V-R., the guidance counselor, despite saying she
would do so in deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R.’s guidance review card, again failed to
notify Plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO that M.A.V-R.
was having problems at school so they could be on the lookout for any harm M.A.V-
R. could cause herself including but in no way limited to acting on suicidal ideations.
60. Following this conversation with M.A.V-R. the guidance counselor again failed to
inform deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R.’s teachers that she was having problems in school
so they could be on the lookout for problems M.A.V-R. was having including but in no
way limited to acting on suicidal ideations.
61. Upon information and belief, the guidance counselor failed to see the signs that
deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R was suffering severe emotional pain and depression as a
result of the bullying she was receiving at school.
62. Upon information and belief, the guidance counselor saw and willfully ignored the
signs that deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R. was suffering severe emotional pain and
depression as a result of the bullying she was receiving at school.
63. On February 28, 2018, deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R attended school in the morning.
11 of 26
64. Upon information and belief, in the early morning February 28, 2018 M.A.V-R had a
show that she participated in which was held in the auditorium.
65. Upon information and belief, following the show, Plaintiff M.A.V-R. was taken into
the back of the unsupervised auditorium by two boys and was forced to perform a sex
act on the two students in the auditorium in the morning of February 28, 2018.
66. Upon information and belief, the students were able to gain access to the auditorium as
it was not locked despite the foreseeable risk that having access to the unsupervised
auditorium could pose to students, such as a place for sexual assault or violence.
67. Upon information and belief, following the forcible sex act, deceased plaintiff M.A.V-
R was made fun of by students in the school.
68. M.A.V-R then left school early without a note or reason to do so.
69. Upon information and belief, M.A.V-R. then went to her home after being relentlessly
bullied.
70. Despite being on notice that deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R. was incessantly bullied and
their knowledge from the day before that M.A.V-R. was having severe emotional
problems, the school failed to notify plaintiff’s teachers that they should be on the
lookout for signs of distress in plaintiff M.A.V-R.
71. As a result of the guidance counselor’s failure to notify plaintiff M.A.V-R.’s teachers,
it went unnoticed that M.A.V-R. left school early by the school and no search into her
whereabouts was conducted despite the schools assumption of responsibility over their
student plaintiff M.A.V-R.
72. Despite being on notice that M.A.V-R. was incessantly bullied and their knowledge
from the day before that M.A.V-R. was having severe emotional problems, the school
12 of 26
failed to notify plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO that they
should be on the lookout for signs of distress in plaintiff M.A.V-R.
73. Due to the failure of the guidance counselor to notify the teachers and the parents, the
Defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and the NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION failed to realize that plaintiff M.A.V-R. had left school early and no
search was conducted to try to find plaintiff M.A.V-R. despite the schools awareness
that she was suffering severe emotional distress.
74. Despite representations in the meeting held on January 24, 2018 from the dean and
principal of Harry S. Truman High School that plaintiff M.A.V-R. was forced to sign
in at every class to curb the problem with attendance (which was caused by the
incessant bullying she was forced to receive), no member of the school noticed that
plaintiff M.A.V-R. was not present in class and the faculty of the school did not search
for plaintiff M.A.V-R. nor notify plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY
VIZCARRONDO that their daughter had left school.
75. Upon information and belief, the principal and dean misrepresented to the parents that
deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R. was required to sign in at every class as a result of her
issue with attendance.
76. Upon information and belief, if the representation that deceased plaintiff was required
to sign in at each class were true, her absence would have triggered a notification of
the parents or a search as to deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R. whereabouts and prevented
her death.
13 of 26
77. The Defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT
OF EDUCATION failed to notify plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY
VIZCARRONDO that their daughter had left school.
78. Hours after M.A.V-R. improperly left the Harry S. Truman High School and still during
school hours M.A.V-R. jumped from the roof of her building with her backpack still
on and fell thirty-four (34) stories at approximately 2:02 pm on February 28, 2018
causing her death.
79. Plaintiff M.A.V-R. jumped to her death during the time she was supposed to be in
school which was scheduled to end daily at 2:20 pm.
80. Plaintiff M.A.V-R. was then taken to Jacobi Medical Center where she was pronounced
dead at 3:02 pm as a result of blunt force trauma of the head and neck with fractures of
skull, multiple including hinge fractures, abrasions to her face, subscapular
hemorrhage, subarachnoid hemorrhage, cerebral convexities, lacerations of dura and
brain, atlanto-occipital dislocation, transection of cervical spine, pontomedullary
amputation, fractures of hyoid bone, thyroid cartilage and trachea, lacerations to
tongue, blunt force trauma of torso with laceration, abrasions and contusions, multiple
bilateral fractures of ribs, fracture of sternum, lacerations of heart, liver, spleen, rights
kidney and aorta, multiple bilateral fractures of pelvis, blunt force trauma of extremities
with contusions and a fracture of the right humerus.
81. Following the death of plaintiff M.A.V-R. minor Viviana D was transferred out of the
school the on the following day on May 1, 2018 as a result of the bullying of plaintiff
M.A.V-R.
14 of 26
82. Upon information and belief, the school was aware that Viviana D was bullying
plaintiff M.A.V-R. prior to plaintiff’s death but took no action which is indicated by
the swift action taken immediately following plaintiff M.A.V-R. death.
83. Following the death of plaintiff M.A.V-R. the guidance counselor, who never contacted
the plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO regarding the
bullying their daughter infant plaintiff M.A.V-R. was forced to endure, was terminated
by the NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
84. Upon information and belief, the guidance counselor was terminated for the improper
handling of the bullying of deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R.
85. Despite being aware of the bullying, the employees failed to notify and/or warn the
parents and plaintiffs herein about the bullying that M.A.V-R. was suffering at school.
86. These employees failed to intervene and protect M.A.V-R. despite owing a duty to the
student to protect her.
87. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School had specific knowledge of the
bullying yet failed to intervene, stop and/or prevent said bullying.
88. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School should have reasonably anticipated
that bullying could foreseeably lead to emotional and physical injuries of their students,
including the potential for suicide but failed to intervene, stop and/or prevent said
bullying
89. The employees of Harry S. Truman High School owed a duty to M.A.V-R. to exercise
such care as an ordinary prudent parent would in comparable circumstances but failed
to act in accordance with this standard in that they negligently supervised, failed to
15 of 26
intervene and failed to notify HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO of
the bullying of M.A.V-R.
90. The bullying of M.A.V-R. was not an impulsive or unanticipated act by a student but
rather occurred almost daily over a period of five (5) months in an open and pervasive
manner.
91. Despite having “loco parentis” over M.A.V-R. the employees of Harry S. Truman High
School failed to protect plaintiff and did not act with ordinary prudence.
AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST CITY OF NEW YORK AND
(Wrongful Death)
92. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege preceding allegations of this complaint with full force
and effect as though set forth at length herein.
93. That on or about February 28, 2018, the deceased, M.A.V-R. committed suicide by
jumping off the roof of her residence located at 140 Alcott Place, Bronx, New York
10456.
94. That the Defendant CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION’s employees negligently and recklessly failed to
prevent, intervene, supervise, stop, or cease the bullying of M.A.V-R.
warn Plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO of the bullying of
M.A.V-R.
16 of 26
warn Plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO that M.A.V-R. had
left school early nor did they prevent M.A.V-R. from leaving school early.
97. That at all times the employees of Defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW
YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION engaged in the actions and conduct
alleged herein in their capacity as employees of the CITY OF NEW YORK and THE
NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMET OF EDUCATION and under color of State Law,
regulation, ordinance, custom and usage.
98. That such actions were foreseeable that the negligence of the defendants CITY OF
NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION to lead
to the wrongful death of Plaintiff M.A.V-R.
99. That the defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION assumed “loco parentis” over plaintiff M.A.V-R.
as a student of the school Harry S. Truman High School.
100. That plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO relied on the
defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION to act as a reasonably prudent parent would during the time, they were
responsible for their daughter plaintiff M.A.V-R.
101. That the defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and the NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION failed to act as a reasonably prudent parent while
plaintiff M.A.V-R. was under their care.
102. As a direct and proximate result of their negligence, carelessness, recklessness and
unlawfulness, the Defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION caused the death of decedent minor M.A.V-R.
17 of 26
103. By reason of the foregoing, the plaintiff's HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY
VIZCARRONDO, individually and as Administrators of the Estate of M.A.V-R.,
deceased, judgment for wrongful death against defendants the CITY OF NEW YORK
and THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST CITY OF NEW YORK AND
(Negligent Supervision)
104. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the allegations set forth in each preceding
paragraph as if fully set forth herein.
105. From the period of September 2018 until the death of M.A.V-R. on February 28, 2018
the defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION were negligent in their supervision of M.A.V-R.
106. Defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION were negligent in their failure to intervene, stop, prevent, and/or cease
the bullying suffered by M.A.V-R.
107. As a result of their negligence the defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and NEW YORK
CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION placed M.A.V-R. at great risk to harm.
108. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, carelessness, recklessness and
unlawfulness of Defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONS’ negligent supervision to the plaintiff’s herein,
Plaintiff M.A.V-R. died on February 28, 2018.
109. Defendants CITY OF NEW YORK and THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION knew or reasonably should have known that their negligence in
supervising plaintiffs herein was a conscious disregard for the safety of M.A.V-R., and
18 of 26
likely to M.A.V-R. to suffer harm up to and including but not limited to the suicide of
plaintiff M.A.V-R.
supervising plaintiffs herein was a conscious disregard for the safety of M.A.V-R., so
as to warrant the imposition of punitive damages under the New York state, city and
local laws.
111. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery against Defendant in an amount to be
determined at trial.
AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST CITY OF NEW YORK

AND NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
(Breach of Duty to Provide Adequate Supervision)
EDUCATION, at all times had a duty to provide adequate supervision to M.A.V-R.
while she attended Harry S. Truman High School.
EDUCATION, at all times herein knew or should have known that their failure to
provide adequate supervision of Plaintiff M.A.V-R. of Harry S. Truman High School
and lead to a risk of the very type of danger and harm that occurred on February 28,
2018, namely the suicide of M.A.V-R.
19 of 26
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONS’ breach of the duty to provide adequate
supervision to the plaintiff’s herein, Plaintiff M.A.V-R. died on February 28, 2018.
supervising plaintiffs herein was a conscious disregard for the safety of M.A.V-R., and
likely to M.A.V-R. to suffer harm up to and including the suicide of plaintiff M.A.V-
R.
EDUCATION knew or reasonably should have known that their failure to provide
adequate supervision of the plaintiffs herein was a conscious disregard for the safety of
M.A.V-R., so as to warrant the imposition of punitive damages under the New York
state, city and local laws.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST THE CITY OF NEW

YORK AND THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
(Failure to Warn)
EDUCATION failed to warn Plaintiffs HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY
VIZCARRONDO of the bullying of M.A.V-R.
EDUCATION owed HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO a duty to
20 of 26
keep them informed of the problems M.A.V-R. was having at school, namely that she
was being bullied, intimidated, harassed, verbally and physically abused and breach
that duty of care by failing to provide HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY
VIZCARRONDO with notice that M.A.V-R. was suffering pervasive and harmful
bullying while attending Harry S. Truman High School.
EDUCATION owed HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO a duty to
keep them informed that M.A.V-R. had left school early despite knowing that she was
at an increase risk to harm and breached that duty of care by failing to provide
HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO with notice that M.A.V-R. had
left Harry S. Truman High School early on February 28, 2018.
OF EDUCATION knew or should have known that this failure to warn Plaintiffs
HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO would be a danger to the M.A.V-
R. of Harry S. Truman High School and lead to a risk of the very type of danger and
harm that occurred on February 28, 2018, namely the suicide death of M.A.V-R.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONS’ failure to warn the plaintiff’s herein, Plaintiff
M.A.V-R. died on February 28, 2018.
EDUCATION knew or reasonably should have known that their failure to warn the
21 of 26
plaintiffs herein was a conscious disregard for the safety of M.A.V-R., so as to warrant
the imposition of punitive damages under the New York state, city and local laws.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST THE CITY OF NEW YORK
AND THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
(Negligence, Negligent Hiring, Negligent Supervision and Negligent Retention)
127. Plaintiff realleges and reasserts each of the preceding paragraphs as if full set forth
herein.
EDUCATION owed Plaintiff and the general population of Harry S. Truman High
School a duty of reasonable care in the hiring, training and supervision of its
employees.
EDUCATION did breach that duty of care in the hiring, retention and/or supervision
of employees, who were unfit to be a provide Plaintiff M.A.V-R. with counseling,
intervention, diagnosis, and/or prevention of the bullying she was receiving while on
the grounds of Harry S. Truman High School.
OF EDUCATION knew or should have known that this negligence in training,
supervision and retention would be a danger to the students of Harry S. Truman High
School and lead to a risk of the very type of danger and harm that occurred on February
28, 2018, namely the death of M.A.V-R.
22 of 26
unlawfulness of Defendant, Plaintiff sustained deadly injuries.
EDUCATION knew or reasonably should have known that their employees were unfit
and employed him with a conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others, so as to
warrant the imposition of punitive damages under the New York state, city and local
laws.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST THE CITY OF NEW YORK
Loss of Services, Companionship, Society, Comfort and Affection of M.A.V-R. by
Plaintiff NELLY VIZCARRONDO, individually)
135. That on or about February 28, 2018, the plaintiff NELLY VIZCARRONDO was the
mother of decedent infant plaintiff M.A.V-R., resided with her and was entitled to her
services, companionship, society, comfort and affection.
136. That on or about February 28, 2018, NELLY VIZCARRONDO was the mother of
infant plaintiff M.A.V-R., resided with her, and was entitled to her services,
companionship society, comfort and affection.
137. That as a result of the defendants’ CITY OF NEW YORK and the NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMET OF EDUCATION negligence which resulted in the death of infant
plaintiff M.A.V-R. plaintiff NELLY VIZCARRONDO has been deprived of the
services, companionship, society, comfort and affection of her late daughter forever.
23 of 26
138. By reason of the foregoing the plaintiff NELLY VIZCARRONDO, individually, and
as administrator of the estate of infant plaintiff M.A.V-R., deceased demands judgment
for loss of services, companionship, society, comfort and affection against the
EDUCATION individually and severally.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST THE CITY OF NEW YORK
Loss of Services, Companionship, Society, Comfort and Affection of M.A.V-R. by
Plaintiff HERIBERTO RIOS, individually)
140. That on or about February 28, 2018, the plaintiff HERBIERTO RIOS was the father of
decedent infant plaintiff M.A.V-R., resided with him and was entitled to her services,
companionship, society, comfort and affection.
141. That on or about February 28, 2018, HERIERTO RIOS was the father of infant plaintiff
M.A.V-R, resided with him, and was entitled to her services, companionship society,
comfort and affection.
142. That as a result of the defendants’ CITY OF NEW YORK and the NEW YORK CITY
DEPARTMET OF EDUCATION negligence which resulted in the death of infant
plaintiff M.A.V-R. plaintiff HERBIERTO RIOS has been deprived of the services,
companionship, society, comfort and affection of his late daughter forever.
143. By reason of the foregoing the plaintiff HERBIERTO RIOS, individually, and as
administrator of the estate of infant plaintiff M.A.V-R., deceased demands judgment
for loss of services, companionship, society, comfort and affection against the
24 of 26
EDUCATION individually and severally.
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs, HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO, individually
and as Administrators to the estate of minor M.A.V-R., deceased, demand judgment against the
defendants, jointly and severally, in an amount of damages which exceeds the monetary
jurisdictional limits of any and all lower courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction in the
amount determined upon trial of this action.

May 27, 2019 _________/s/___________________
John Scola
Law Office of John A. Scola, PLLC
Attorney for the Plaintiff
30 Broad Street, Suite 1424
New York, New York 10004
(917-423-1445
ATTORNEY VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK )

COUNTY OF NEW YORK )
I, the undersigned, an attorney duly admitted to practice law in the State of New York,
under penalties of perjury do affirm;
That I am the attorney of record for the plaintiff in the within matter and make this
affirmation in accordance with CPLR 3020. I have read the within Summons and
Verified Complaint and know the contents thereof to be true to your affirmant’s own
knowledge, with the exception of those matters therein stated to be alleged upon
information and belief. Your affirmant bases his belief regarding those matters upon the
contents of the file and conversation with the plaintiff.
25 of 26
This verification is made by your affirmant and not by the plaintiff for the following
reason; plaintiff resides in a different County than where your affirmant maintains an
office.

May 27, 2019 ______/s/_________________
John Scola
26 of 26

Vizcarrondo Rios Vs NYC Dept of Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vizcarrondo Rios Vs NYC Dept of Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 05/28/2019 12:20 PM INDEX NO.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

-against- Plaintiff designates

THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK

TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS:

Dated: New York, New York

CITY OF NEW YORK

NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Plaintiffs, VERIFIED COMPLAINT

THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK

respectfully sets forth and alleges as follows

City and State of the New York.

of the Bronx, City and State of New York.

County of the Bronx, City and State of New York.

the virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

EDUCATION, its agencies, bureaus, departments, agents, servants and/or employees

State of New York.

EDUCATION, its agencies, bureaus, departments, agents, servants and/or employees

State of New York.

EDUCATION, its agencies, bureaus, departments, agents, servants and/or employees

State of New York.

EDUCATION, its agencies, bureaus, departments, agents, servants and/or employees

State of New York.

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION operated, maintained, managed and controlled

for the care and education of children,

EDUCATION, by delivering a copy thereof in duplicate to the officer designated to

damage and injuries sustained so far as was then determinable.

made within the applicable period.

YORK AND THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION employed

referred to as “employees”) at Harry S. Truman High School.

CITY OF NEW YORK and NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

and NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

but failed to intervene.

occurred on the grounds of Harry S. Truman High School.

of Harry S. Truman High School.

but failed to intervene.

Truman High School.

but failed to intervene.

employees had constructive notice of the harassment but failed to intervene.

Harry S. Truman High School.

received by M.A.V-R. but failed to intervene.

acts received by plaintiff M.A.V-R. but failed to intervene.

but failed to intervene.

grounds of Harry S. Truman High School.

while at school, received by plaintiff M.A.V-R. but failed to intervene.

2018 but failed to intervene.

and/or prevent said bullying but failed to do so anyway.

obviously body shamed plaintiff M.A.V-R.

regularly and obviously verbally assault plaintiff.

regularly and obviously physically assault plaintiff.

the employees of Harry S. Truman High School.

bullying plaintiff M.A.V-R. was forced to endure.

bullying she was forced to endure.

M.A.V-R. back to class.

VIZCARRONDO about the meeting.

regarding the bullying she was forced to endure.

intervention by the school.

HERIBERTO RIOS and NELLY VIZCARRONDO about the meeting.

plaintiff M.A.V-R. that M.A.V-R. was having problems.

R. gym class to discuss personal issues with M.A.V-R.

M.A.V-R. for any signs of physical or verbal abuse.

would do so in deceased plaintiff M.A.V-R.’s guidance review card, again failed to