Stipulation

    CITY COUNCIL ® Dec '5.,95° 12-34 No .00V .P.US3 

Fax :£14530a20 DEC 4 "9% op P.O 

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 
COUNTY OF QUEENS 

THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, 

et al., 

Plaintiffs, STIPULATION 

- against - Index No. 004897-96 

RUDOLPH W. GIULIAN], THE MAYOR OF THE 

CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., 

Defendants. 

WHEREAS: 

(i) The plaintiffs are seeking a judgment enjoining any proposed transactions 

involving the sale, lease, sublease or other disposition of Coney Island Hospital (or any other 

hospital leased to and operated by the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation and 

owned by the City of New York}; 

(i) All the parties have moved for summary judgment, which motions arc 

expected 10 be fully submitted to the Court for decision in or about the first week of January, 

1997; 

(iii) The Court has indicated that it expects to issue a decision on the motions 

for summary judgment in or about the end of January, 1997; ; 

(iv) The defendants are moving forward with plans to implement such 

transactions but have represented to plaintiffs that final action is not imminent; and 

C ’ G5 Ly DEC B85 S585 14:30 212 788 31439 PRGE. 33  



    CITY COUNCIL “® Pec 5,96 12:35 "No 001 P.04 

Fax :£L21850430 DEC 4 "0 ~ 4) Foo: 

(v) Pending a decision of the Court on the motions for summary judgment, the 

parties seek to avoid the necessity of litigating a motion for preliminary injunction, provided, 

however, that no prejudice results therefrom; now, then, 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys of 

record for all of the parties hereto as follows: 

1 Subject to paragraph 2 hereof, defendants agree that the consummation of 

a transaction for the lease, sublease, sale or other disposition of Coney Island Hospital (or any 

other hospital leased to and operated by defendant Health and Hospitals Corporation and owned 

by the City of New York) will not occur before the cross-motions for summary judgment are 

decided by the Court. | 

2. In the event the Court does not decide the pending motions on or before 

March 3, 1997, defendants shall not thereafter be barred by reason of the agreement contained 

in paragraph 1 from consummating the transaction described in paragraph 1. Provided, however, 

that in the event defendants propose to consummate the transaction described in paragraph 1 on 

or after March 3, 1997, counsel for defendants shall provide no less than 30 days’ prior writen 

notice to plaintiffs’ counsel of any scheduled consummation of such transaction. 

3, In the event the Court decides the pending motions for summary judgment 

in defendants’ favor, then during the pendency of this lawsuit (including any appeals): (a) 

counsel for defendants shall provide no less than 30 days’ prior written notice to plaintif{s’ 

counsel of any scheduled consummation of the transaction described in paragraph 1; and (b) 

plaintiffs may then seek such injunctive relief as they deem appropriate with respect thereto. 

It is understood that either party may seek an expedited appeal from an order of the Court. 

DEC B85 S95 11:48 212 783 39143 PAGE. G4 

 



   
CITy ‘COUNCIL a Pec“ 5.,$8:-12:35 No.O0UL POS 

Fax :z12r380450 pec «4 M0 of) FOL 

4, Plaintiffs may move (upon no Jess than 48 hours’ notice, during which time 

plaintiffs will afford defendants an opportunity to discuss the basis for the proposed motion) for 

injunctive relief to enjoin the consummation of the transaction described in paragraph 1 hereof. 

In such event, the defendants shall not assert any legal or equitable defense involving laches or 

delay on the part of plaintiffs, arising by reason of plaintiffs’ forbearance under this Stipulation. 

Dated: New York, New York 

December &/, 1996 

   
the City of New York 

100 Church Street 
New York, New York 10007 

(212) 788-0412 

Attorney for Defendants 

GREENBLATT LLP    

  

\ _
 

The Chrysler Buildin 
405 Lexington Avenue 

New York, New York 10174 

(212) 885-5000 

RICHARD M. WEINBERG 

General Counsel 

City Council of the City 
of New York 

75 Park Place 

/ New York, New York 10007 

(212) 788-7000 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs in No. 004897/96 

  
  

DEC @5 S65 11:40 212 788 9145 PAGE. B5 

 



   
12/02/84 MON 1 12: 37 ph 1212 885 5002 TENZER GREENBLATT L.L.P doos 

5. The parties have since submitted papers and reply papers 

pursuant to the direction of the Court in the November 12 telephone 

conference. Accordingly, all of the parties received adequate 

notice of the fact that the Court was considering the question of 

whether the privatization program is ultya vires, and were afforded 

a full opportunity to address it thereafter in their additional 

submissions. No party has been prejudiced, and the issue is ripe 

for adjudication. 

Dated: New York, New York 

December 2, 1956 

J a 
~ IRA A. FINKELSTEIN 
  

DEC B82 ’S6 12:48 1212 885 5602 PRGE. 84