| |
| | Bath Petroleum Storage, Inc. and EIL Petroleum, Inc. - Ruling 7 |
 | | Respondent’s eleventh affirmative defense asserts that all causes of action must be dismissed as against Respondent Weinberg, because the 2003 Amended Complaint seeks to impose personal liability upon him, and "[s]imilarly situated corporations and entities have not suffered the personal prosecution of officers such as Respondent for similar conduct." Answer, ¶ 67, at 27. |
 | | In the twelfth affirmative defense, Respondent Weinberg claims that all causes of action must be dismissed because the 2003 Amended Complaint seeks to impose personal liability upon him for the acts of the Corporate Respondents, "and/or his actions as an officer or director of said corporations." Answer, at 28, ¶ 70. |
 | | The affirmative defense goes on to state that "[u]pon information and belief, at all relevant times, the Department was aware of the processes in use at Respondent’s facility and minimal, incremental expansion in cavern size due to the normal operation of an underground LPG storage facility." Answer, ¶ 96, at 31. |
| www.dec.state.ny.us /website/ohms/decis/bathr7.html (3711 words) |
|