SUMMONS

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ; Reset Form:!
COUNTY OF QUEENS * *

x

SULTAN AL MARUF
[YOUR NAME(S)]

Date Index No. / A rv ,
purchased 13\/3Q/A°A |

Plaintiff(s)1 Index No.

-against-
SUMMONS

CITY OF NEW YORK,
and THE NEW YORK CITY COMMISSION
ON HUMAN RIGHTS
[NAME OF PERSON(S) SUED]
Defendant(s)
To the Person(s) Named as Defendant(s) Above:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the
complaint of the plaintiff(s) herein and to serve a copy of your answer on the plaintiff(s)at the
address indicated below within 20 days after the service of this Summons (not counting the
day of service itself), or within 30 days after service is complete if the Summons is not
delivered personally to you within the State of New York.
x

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT should you fail to answer, a judgment will be
entered against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint.
Dated: DECEMBER 30 21 SULTAN AL MARUF 20
[DATE OF SUMMONS] [YOUR NAME(S)]
3605 29TH STREET, APT E9,
LONG ISLAND CITY, NY 11106
[YOUR ADDRESS(ES) and
PHONE NUMBER(S)]

Defendant’s Address City of New York, Attn: Corporation Counsel, 100 Church St., 5th FI., New York, NY 10007

[ADDRESS OF PERSON(S) SUED]
Plaintiff(s) designate(s) Queens County as the place of trial. The basis of this
designation is [CHECK ONE]:
_3 Plaintiff(s)’ Residence in Queens County.
Defendant(s)’ Residence in Queens County.
Other – Describe:

Venue:

NOTE: THIS FORM OF SUMMONS MUST BE SERVED WITH A COMPLAINT

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

1 of 15

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
73&k00/4°Al SULTAN AL MARUF, Index No.

Plaintiff

-against- COMPLAINT
CITY OF NEW YORK, and
THE NEW YORK CITY COMMISSION ON JURY DEMANDED
HUMAN RIGHTS

Defendants.

NATURE OF ACTION

1. In this action, Plaintiff Sultan Maruf (“Plaintiff’), is filing a Complaint against
   Defendants City of New York and the New York City Commission on Human Rights (“the
   NYCCHR”), together “Defendants”, on the basis ofthe underlying grounds.
2. The New York City Office ofthe Comptroller issued claim number 2021PI000285.
3. This Complaint arises from discrimination and harassment against Plaintiff.
   Plaintiff, of Bangladeshi national origin, was subjected to discriminatory comments and
   harassment from his landlord’s manager, on the basis of his national origin.
4. Plaintiff consequently filed a Complaint at the NYCCHR’s office. However,
   employees ofthe NYCCHR intentionally and/or negligently delayed to prosecute Plaintiffs case
   amidst Plaintiffs incessant emails, expressing his concerns for the delay.

2

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

2 of 15

5. Plaintiff, therefore, files this case against Defendants for negligently and/or
   intentionally delaying Plaintiffs case; pushed for settlement contrary to Plaintiffs intention; and
   dropped the case when Plaintiffrefused to accept the settlement offer.
   JURISDICTION AND VENUE
6. Pursuant to New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (“CPLR”) § 301 and/or § 302,
   this Court has jurisdiction over Defendants because they are residents of and/or authorized to do
   business in New York State.
7. Venue is proper in this county pursuant to CPLR § 503, as Plaintiff resides in
   Queens County.

PARTIES

Plaintiff Sultan Marufis a resident of Queens County.
At all times mentioned, Defendant’ City of New York, was and is a municipal
corporation duly organized and existing by virtue ofthe laws ofthe State ofNew York.
8.
9.

10. Upon information and belief, Defendant New York City Commission of Human
    Rights is an agency ofthe City ofNew York, and created and organized by virtue ofthe laws of
    the State ofNew York.
11. NYCCHR staff/officials/employees refers to employees and other governmental
    officials who participated in the relevant facts but some identities and/or full names are unknown.
    (John and Jane Doe collectively referred to as “Officers” or “Officer Defendants”). Some known
    to be directly involved are as follows:
    Katherine Carroll
    Johanna C. Segal
    Martha Perez-Pedemonti

3

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

3 of 15

Charles (last name unknown)
Boris (last name unknown)
Carmelyn P. Malalis, former NYCCHR Chair and Commissioner
Sapna V. Raj, NYCCHR Deputy Commissioner in the NYCCHR
Law Enforcement Bureau

12. Upon information and belief, at all times mentioned, Defendant NYCCHR
    employees, were and are, officers ofthe Defendant City ofNew York, and at all times herein was
    acting in such capacity as the agent, servant, and employees ofthe Defendant City ofNew York.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

13. Plaintiffwas a residential tenant oflandlord EB Management Properties, LLC.
14. On or about January 4, 2016, Plaintiffs landlord’s manager discriminated against
    him by failing to do necessary repairs and by failing to address a bed-bug infestation in a timely
    manner because ofhis Bangladeshi national origin, in violation of § 8-107(5) ofthe Administrative
    Code ofthe City ofNew York.
15. The said manager also harassed, threatened, and intimidated Plaintiff, in his place
    ofresidence, because ofhis Bangladeshi nation origin, in violation ofTitle 8 ofthe Administrative
    Code ofthe City ofNew York. A recording, about 15 minutes and 48 seconds long, exists of one
    such incident in which the landlord’s manager states, to wit, “Bangladeshi, Indian, and Pakistani
    people brought bedbugs in this country.” The landlord’s manager subsequently refused to engage
    in repairs and maintenance required by law.
16. On or about January 3, 2017, Plaintifffiled a Complaint at the NYCCHR.
17. On or about March 12, 2019, Katherine Carroll, Assistant Commissioner in the
    NYCCHR Law Enforcement Bureau (“Assistant Commissioner Carroll”), issued a Notice of

4

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

4 of 15

Probable Cause Determination and of Intent to Proceed to Public Hearing (the “Notice of
Probable Cause”). The notice was issued pursuant to Plaintiffs claim(s) of discriminatory
practices by landlord EB Management Properties, LLC, in which the landlord refused to make
repairs and to address a bed bug infestation because of Plaintiffs Bangladeshi national origin.

18. It took the NYCCHR 798 days (2 years, 2 months, and 9 days) to issue this Notice
    of probable cause, despite the fact that evidence of discrimination provided via audio recording
    was only 15 minutes and 48 seconds long.
19. After the said Notice, the NYCCHR failed to provide any further communication
    about the next step. On or about July 8, 2019, Plaintiff wrote the NYCCHR an email expressing
    concerns that he had not received any public hearing date, location, and time concerning the issue.
20. On or about July 19,2019, the said Defendant responded to Plaintiffs email. In the
    said response, the NYCCHR informed Plaintiff that the next step in his case was to schedule a
    settlement conference.
21. On or about July 27, 2019, Plaintiffresponded to the NYCCHR and expressed his
    intent to file a lawsuit against the landlord, instead of engaging in settlement discussions.

Defendant failed to respond to the said email response from Plaintiff, which prompted a follow-
up email from Plaintiff expressing his frustrations for the lack of attention to his matter.

22. On or about August 29, 2019, Assistant Commissioner Carroll responded to
    Plaintiffs emails, informing Plaintiffthat the reason for the delayed response is that the NYCCHR
    was waiting for an attorney to take over the case.
23. On or about December 5, 2019, Plaintiff filed an official complaint to the
    Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, alleging the dilatory conduct of the NYCCHR’s staff,
    who handled Plaintiffs case.

5

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

5 of 15

24. It is worth noting that the dilatory conduct of the NYCCHR occurred after the
    NYCCHR had already issued the Notice of Probable Cause, and assigned a contact to handle the
    case. Plaintiff had already been issued three settlement dates.
25. On or about April 22, 2020, the NYCCHR referred Plaintiffs complaint to the
    Office ofAdministrative Trials and Hearings.
26. On or about May. 15, 2020, Plaintiff attended a mandatory pre-trial settlement
    conference, where Assistant Commissioner Carroll proposed to the judge that Plaintiff accepts
    $5000 from the landlord in order to settle the case; and stated that ifPlaintiffwould not accept the
    settlement, the NYCCHR would drop the case.
27. On or about October 8, 2020, in the vicinity oftheir office, located in the City of
    New York, County ofNew York, and State ofNew York, the Defendantsjointly and severally, in
    their capacity as officers, committed retaliatory actions upon Plaintiff.
28. On the above-mentioned date, Johanna C. Segal, Esq., on duty as an officer for the
    Defendants, in her capacity as an Agency Attorney in the Law Enforcement Bureau of the
    NYCCHR -issued a closure letter at the Plaintiffs for administrative cause, 13 94 days (3 years 9
    months and 5 days) after Plaintiff began his Complaint with the NYCCHR.
29. Plaintifffiled a claim at the New York City Office ofthe Comptroller against the
    NYCCHR, alleging psychological and emotional damage that he underwent incidental and
    consequential to the said Defendant’s actions and/or inactions
30. Pursuant to CPLR Section 1602(2)(iv), Defendants are jointly and severally liable
    for all ofthe Plaintiffs’ damages, including but not limited to Plaintiff non-economic loss.
31. The oral examination of Plaintiff has been conducted in compliance with Section
    50-H ofthe General Municipal Law.

6

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

6 of 15

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of Due Process Rights

32. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the
    preceding paragraphs ofthis complaint as though fully stated herein.
33. Justice delayed is justice denied. Plaintiff was entitled to a timely prosecution of
    the case.
34. Defendants violated Plaintiffs due process rights as already alleged in Count 1
    above. Notably, Plaintiffs Complaint was lodged January 3, 2017, and a probable cause letter was
    issued March 12, 2019. It took the NYCCHR 798 days (2 years, 2 months, and 9 days) to issue a
    probable cause letter whereas the audio recording length was only 15 minutes and 48 seconds long.
35. Any reasonable person would conclude within a few minutes that (recorded
    conversation) landlord’s remarks were racist and degrading to the Bangladeshi, Indian, and
    Pakistani communities.
36. Furthermore, the NYCCHR’s Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner never
    answered or responded to the plaintiffs complaints about their employees.
37. As a result of Defendants’ actions alleged herein, Plaintiff has suffered incidental,
    and consequential damages. Plaintiff had to undergo treatment for psychological and emotional
    distress.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
New York State Human Rights Law § 296 (7)

Retaliation

38. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the
    preceding paragraphs ofthis complaint as though fully stated herein.

7

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

7 of 15

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

8 of 15

39. The NYCCHR engaged in retaliation against Plaintiff due to his complaints to its
    Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner regarding its employees.
40. The NYCCHR also never answered or responded to Plaintiffs complaints
    regarding its employees.
41. It appears that the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner’s inaction emboldened
    employees to take retaliatory actions.
42. While tormenting the plaintiff for about 3 years and 10 months, the employees
    assessed a $5,000 settlement from the landlord as reasonable, despite Plaintiffs desire for an
    equitable resolution determined by a Court, which would restore the reputation and dignity of his
    self, community, and national origin. Plaintiff never accepted any amount ofmoney.
43. Therefore, the NYCCHR engaged in professional misconduct through harassment
    and coercion, such as, not replying to emails, stonewalling process of law, not replying to phone
    calls, and constantly coercing to accept the $5000 settlement.
44. Furthermore, Assistant Commissioner Carroll showed up at the pre-trial settlement
    conference held on May 15, 2020 and took over the proceeding. She stated that the NYCCHR
    would not take Plaintiffs Complaint into the court system.
45. This was a retaliatory act, and also in conflict ofinterest, as Assistant Commissioner
    Carroll herself was mentioned in Plaintiffs complaint letter to the NYCCHR. The case was
    already being handled by another NYCCHR employee (Johanna C. Segal, Esq. and supervisor),
    but Assistant Commissioner Caroll interfered in the settlement conference and determined the
    decision ofthe commission.
46. Furthermore, the determination letter falsely claimed,

8

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

9 of 15

“The Law Enforcement Bureau is closing your case for administrative cause.
The Law Enforcement Bureau in its discretion may close cases for
“administrative cause” when it declines to complete its investigation for reasons
described in the City Human Rights Law at § 8-113(a) of the Administrative
Code ofthe City ofNew York.”

47. Plaintiff avers that they already completed the investigation and issued a Notice of
    Probable Cause. A Notice of Probable cause is issued when the NYCCHR completes an
    investigation and is in the process oftaking the case to trial, due to there being sufficient probable
    cause to infer that a discriminatory action took place.
48. After issuing the Notice of Probable Cause, NYCCHR employees covered up the
    probable cause letter and again engaged in stonewalling the Plaintiffs case, by transferring his
    case internally to another employee.
49. As a result ofDefendants’ actions alleged herein, Plaintiff has suffered incidental,
    and consequential damages. Plaintiff had to undergo treatment for psychological and emotional
    distress.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
NYC § 8-113.
Abuse of Discretion

50. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the
    preceding paragraphs ofthis complaint as though fully stated herein.
51. The NYCCHR dismissed the Complaint in violation ofthe aforementioned law.
52. Plaintiff avers that there was no good cause to dismiss the Complaint. Notably, the
    said Defendant had the ability to locate the Plaintiff at all times; the Plaintiff has never failed to

9

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

10 of 15

appear at any scheduled meeting with the said Defendant; the Plaintiff has not engaged in any
conduct which is disruptive to the orderly functioning ofthe commission; the Defendant pushed
for a settlement contrary to Plaintiffs wishes; and prosecution of the case would serve public
interest.

53. As a result of Defendants’ actions alleged herein, Plaintiff has suffered incidental,
    and consequential damages. Plaintiff had to undergo treatment for psychological and emotional
    distress.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
New York Charter § 1116

Fraud; neglect of duty; willful violation of law relative to office.

54. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the
    preceding paragraphs ofthis complaint as though fully stated herein.
55. NYCCHR employees willfully violated laws relating to its office as a New York
    City Agency.
56. Assistant Commissioner Carroll also violated the said law by knowingly making a
    false or deceptive report or statement in the course of duty. Notably, she sent Plaintiffthe Notice
    of Probable Cause yet knowing that they would still delay on the investigation, and prolong the
    said investigation to years.
57. As a result of Defendants’ actions alleged herein, Plaintiff has suffered incidental,
    and consequential damages. Plaintiff had to undergo treatment for psychological and emotional
    distress.
58. Further, the said Assistant Commissioner Carroll also violated the said law by
    interfering with the investigation of Plaintiffs case. She pushed for settlement of the case yet

10

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

11 of 15

Plaintiff had a meritorious claim that would have been subjected to a court verdict in the interest
ofjustice.

59. On or about October 8, 2020, date, Johanna C. Segal, Esq., issued a closure letter
    thus dismissing Plaintiffs claim completely.
60. All the aforesaid conduct(s) amounted to a neglect of duty and violation of law
    related to the office ofthe employees.
61. As a result ofDefendants’ actions alleged herein, Plaintiffhas suffered incidental,
    and consequential damages. Plaintiff had to undergo treatment for psychological and emotional
    distress.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Intentional Infliction ofEmotional Distress

62. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the
    preceding paragraphs ofthis complaint as though fully stated herein.
63. The conduct ofthe Defendants, as set forth above, was extreme, and outrageous.
64. Defendants ought to have reasonably known that their actions and/or inactions
    would cause severe harm on Plaintiff.
65. The Defendants filed to consider the adverse effects oftheir actions and/or inactions
    on Plaintiff. Notably, they failed to acknowledge the fact that such conduct would lead Plaintiff
    into bankruptcy, and would make Plaintiffincur unprecedented costs.
66. As a result ofDefendants’ actions alleged herein, Plaintiff has suffered incidental,
    and consequential damages. Plaintiff had to undergo treatment for psychological and emotional
    distress.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

11

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

12 of 15

Declaratory Relief

67. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in all the
    preceding paragraphs ofthis complaint as though fully stated herein.
68. There now exists, between the parties hereto, a dispute and controversy to which
    the Plaintiff and the Defendants are entitled to have a declaration oftheir rights and further relief
    relating to the facts and circumstances as set forth in this action.
69. Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court issue a declaratory judgment
    declaring that the actions and/or inactions of the Defendants violate the rights of Plaintiff, and
    issue appropriate remedies thereof.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffis entitled to damages and remedies from the Defendants, and
he hereby prays that judgment to be entered in his favor and against the Defendants as follows:
i. That the Court orders compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined
by the Court for the Defendants’ conduct alleged herein, and for Plaintiffs medical costs.
ii. That the Court grants Declaratory Order against Defendants for their actions and/or
inactions alleged herein.
m. Interest as provided by law;
iv. An award offees and costs;
v. That the Court issues any other order that this institution deemsjust.

12

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

13 of 15

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiffhereby demands a trial by jury on all issues offact and damages stated herein.

Dated: December 30, 2021

SULTAN AL MARUF

Pro Se Plaintiff

13

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

14 of 15

; Reset Form •

VERIFICATION

SULTAN AL MARUF (YOUR NAME), being duly sworn, deposes and says:
I am the plaintiff in the above-entitled action. I have read the foregoing
complaint and know the contents thereof. The same are true to my knowledge, except
as to matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief and as to those
matters I believe them to be true.

[Signature]
SULTAN AL MARUF [Printed]

Plaintiff

Sworn to before me this
cXyday of Oec. 2oei-f

Notary Publ^ltafeTf NewYork
No. 04EN6405207
ComSialified in Queens County
Notary Public mmission Expires March 2 mf /

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 12/30/2021 09:40 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2021

15 of 15

Exhibit B

INSTRUCTIONS: THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST BE USED FOR SERVICE OF INITIATING PAPERS (ASUMMONS AND
COMPLAINT, SUMMONS WITH NOTICE, NOTICE OF PETITION AND PETITION, OR ORDERTOSHOW CAUSE
AND PETITION). SERVER MUST SIGN HIS/HER NAME IN THE PRESENCE OF A NOTARY PUBLIC. PRINT
AND USE BLACK INK ONLY. FILL IN THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES AND COMPLETE THE BLANK SPACES
PRINTED IN BOLD TYPE.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
—…–..———…——————————–.—X
SULTAN AL MARUF

Index Number
[FILL IN NAME(S)] 7 2-f Coof 2-O2-/

Plaintiff(syPetitioner(s)

[INSERT INDEX NUMBER]

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
-against- OF INITIATING PAPERS

CITY OF NEW YORK,
and THE NEW YORK CITY COMMISSION
ON HUMAN RIGHTS
[FILL IN NAME(S)]

Defendant(S)/Respondent(s)
__-..———————..–.-.-..————-x

STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF

QUEENS

ss.: [FILL IN COUNTY WHERE AFFIDAVIT WAS SIGNED]

SHAIKH ALAM

[NAME OF PERSON WHO
SERVED PAPERS], being duly sworn, depose and say: I am over 18 years of age and am not a
party to this case. I reside at 45-55 41ST

STREET, APT 4C, SUNNYSIDE, NY 11104 [SERVER’S

ADDRESS). On DECEMBER 30

, 2021__[DATE OF SERVICE), at 3_.3f_ A.M. [TIME OF DAY],

I served the attached papers, namely the

SUMMONS and COMPLAINT

[IDENTIFY
THE PAPERS SERVED}on City of New York, Attn: Corporation Counsel, [INSERT NAME OF PARTY
SERVED], a efenda espondent [CIRCLE ONElin this case. The address of the place where the
papers were served is

100 Church St., 5th FL, New York, 1W 10007

LOCATION WHERE PAPERS WERE SERVED].
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 01/17/2022 03:46 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/17/2022

1 of 3

I served the papers in the manner indicated below [CHECK OFF THE APPROPRIATE BOX]:

1) O INDIVIDUAL by delivering a true copy of each to the defendant personally; I knew
the person served to be the person named in those papers. [FILL OUT DESCRIPTION
BELOW.]

2) O CORPORATION , a domestic

c o r p
o r a t i o n , b y

d e I i v e r i n g

a t r u e c o p y

o f e a c h t o
[1DENTIFY PERSON
SERVED), who is {lDENTIFY THE INDIVIDUAL TO
WHOM THE PAPERS WERE DELIVERED AND HIS/HER JOB TITLE]; I knew the corporation
to be that listed in the papers served and I knew the title of the person named above
and that he/she was authorized to accept service.

3) SUBSTITUTED SERVICE by delivering a true copy of each to

/hARKE [INSERT NAME OF PERSON], a person of suitable age and
discretion, at the actual place of business, dwelling house, or usual place of abode
in the state, and mailing, as indicated below.

O SUBSTITUTED SERVICE by affixing a true copy to the door at

Which is the defendants
I made prior attempts to serve at this location on the following dates and times:

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 01/17/2022 03:46 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/17/2022

2 of 3

MAILING I also enclosed a copy of the above papers in a postpaid (already had the stamps
(USE on it), sealed envelope properly addressed to defendant at defendant’s last
WITH 3) known residence or actual place of business, located at

City of New York, Attn: Corporation Counsel,
100 Church St.. 5th Fl., New York, NY 10007 [ADDRESS), and I deposited the
envelope in a post office depository under the exclusive care and custody of the
United States Postal Service within New York State.

DESCRIP- The individual I served had the following characteristics:
TION 2 Male _

Female Hair color Skin Color

(USE WITH _

21-34 yrs. _

35-50 yrs. _

51-61 yrs. __
Over 61

1,2 OR 3) _

120-150 Ibs. Ó51-181 Ibs. Over 182 Ibs.

O MILITARY SERVICE I asked the person to whom I spoke whether the
defendant was in active service in the military of the United States or New York
State in any capacity and I was told that he/she was not. Defendant did not wear
a military uniform. I state upon information and belief that the defendant is not in
the military service of the United States or New York State. The bases for my
belief are the conversations and observatio described abo e.

[SE VER S NAME SIGNED]

Sworn to before me on
this y

of , 20_1 [SERVER’S N E PRINTED]

Notary Rublic

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 01/17/2022 03:46 AM INDEX NO. 728600/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/17/2022

3 of 3

Exhibit C

NYSCEF Confirmation Notice

728600/2021

Documents Received on

SULTAN AL MARUF v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al

Queens County Supreme Court

12/30/2021 09:40 AM
Assigned Judge: None Recorded

The NYSCEF website has received an electronic filing on 12/30/2021 09:40 AM. Please keep this notice
as a confirmation of this filing.

Doc # Document Type
1 SUMMONS + COMPLAINT

Filing User
Filed by court user.

E-mail Notifications
An email regarding this filing has been sent to the following on 12/30/2021 09:40 AM:

Email Notifications NOT Sent
Role Party Attorney
Respondent CITY OF NEW YORK No consent on record.
THE NEW YORK CITY No consent on record.
COMMISSION ON HUMAN

Respondent

• Court rules require hard copy service upon non-participating parties and attorneys who have opted-out or declined
  consent.

Page 1 of 1
NYSCEF Resource Center, nyscef@nycourts.gov
Audrey I. Pheffer, Queens County Clerk and Clerk of the Supreme Court
Phone: 718-298-0173, 718-298-0601 Website: https://www.nycourts.gov/COURTS/11jd/queensclerk

Phone: (646) 386-3033 | Fax: (212) 401-9146 | Website: www.nycourts.gov/efile

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )