Equine Law Matter - Closed - Get Information, Read Court Documents Default judgment of almost $77K entered against co-defendant Aisha Ali-Duyck remains outstanding

CHRISTINA WELTZ, Plaintiff, v. STONY HILL STABLES, INC., ELIZABETH HOTCHKISS, AISHA ALI-DUYCK, Defendants.

No.  157752-2014

State of New York Supreme Court

 

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

Dr. Christina Weltz, by her attorneys, Hodgson Russ LLP, files this Complaint
against Defendants Stony Hill Stables, Inc. (“Stony Hill”), Elizabeth Hotchkiss, and Aisha Ali-
Duyck (collectively, the “defendants”).

 

Nature of the Action

1. This is an action by plaintiff to recover significant sums expended for the
purchase, veterinary treatment, daily care and maintenance, and training of plaintiff’s horse,
which was purchased for her child in reliance upon numerous material misrepresentations made
by defendants, the plaintiff’s trusted agents and advisors.

 

Parties and Jurisdiction

 

2. Dr. Weltz is a resident of Manhattan Island in the County of New York
and the State of New York.
3. Defendant Stony Hill is a New York corporation with a principal place of
business at 268 Town Lane, Amagansett, New York.

4. Defendant Elizabeth Hotchkiss is a resident of Amagansett in the County
of Suffolk and the State of New York.
5. Upon information and belief, defendant Aisha Ali-Duyck is a resident of
the State of Oregon.
6. Jurisdiction is proper because the defendants contracted with Dr. Weltz for
services provided in this State, and have committed tortious conduct that caused damage to Dr.
Weltz in the State of New York.
7. Venue is proper in this County because Dr. Weltz is a resident of this
County.

 

Facts Relevant to the Claims

The Parties

8. Dr. Weltz is a surgeon at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, New York.
Dr. Weltz’ fourteen-year-old son, Oliver Ritter, is an avid equestrian. Dr. Weltz’ representative,
Nelson Breen, assists Dr. Weltz and her son with their equine activities. All representations
referred to in this complaint were made by defendants either directly to Dr. Weltz or indirectly
through Oliver or Mr. Breen. Both direct and indirect representations will be referred to in the
complaint as being directed to Dr. Weltz.
9. Stony Hill is an equestrian facility in Amagansett in Long Island. Stony
Hill promotes itself as “one of Long Island’s finest stables for over five decades training both
horse and rider in numerous disciplines, including dressage, hunters, jumpers, and equitation.”
Stony Hill endorses its instructors as “highly skilled and dedicated to bringing both horse and
rider up through all levels of the sport.” See Stony Hill Stables’ website available at
http://stonyhillstables.com/.

10. Ms. Hotchkiss owns and operates Stony Hill. As Stony Hill’s owner and
stable manager, Ms. Hotchkiss oversees the day-to-day operations of Stony Hill, including the
hiring and supervision of Stony Hill employees such as Ms. Ali.
11. Ms. Ali is Stony Hill’s former head trainer and instructor.
12. Stony Hill promoted Ms. Ali as a trainer certified by the United States
Hunter Jumper Association (“USHJA”).
13. At all times relevant hereto, Ms. Ali acted in her capacity as agent,
servant, or employee of Stony Hill.

The Parties’ Relationship

14. In 2009, at the age of nine, Dr. Weltz’ son began riding at Stony Hill
under the instruction of Ms. Ali. Stony Hill was considered one of the elite equestrian centers in
Long Island with highly qualified instructors in many disciplines, including dressage, show
jumpers and equitation.
15. Stony Hill, through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms.
Ali, quickly became Dr. Weltz’ trusted advisor for all of Oliver’s equine needs, including riding
instruction, horsemanship skills, and horse care.
16. Beginning in 2010, Ms. Ali traveled with Oliver, and other Stony Hill
students, to competitions to provide coaching on the competitive hunter/jumper circuit.
Defendants also provided its clientele with assistance in purchasing and leasing suitable horses
for their equine needs.

17. In 2010, Dr. Weltz leased a pony for her son to show at several Short
Stirrup competitions throughout the summer. Defendants provided Oliver instruction and
training throughout the summer.
18. In 2011, Dr. Weltz leased another pony for Oliver to show and, in 2012,
Dr. Weltz leased a horse for Oliver to show. Defendants, acting as Dr. Weltz’ agents in
arranging the lease transactions, were paid a commission of ten percent of the lease price. In
arranging the lease transactions, defendants coordinated and arranged for mortality insurance and
major medical coverage, on behalf of Dr. Weltz, for the ponies and horse.
19. Dr. Weltz purchased her son’s first horse, “Copyright,” in April 2013.
Defendants, acting as Dr. Weltz’ agents in arranging the purchase, were paid a commission of
ten percent of the purchase price. In arranging the purchase, defendants coordinated and
arranged for mortality insurance and major medical coverage, on behalf of Dr. Weltz, for
Copyright.
20. Copyright was purchased for use as a competitive equitation horse for
Oliver to compete on the hunter/jumper show circuit.
21. In fall 2013, Stony Hill distributed registration forms for the Winter
Equestrian Festival (“WEF”) to Dr. Weltz and its other clients. WEF is a prestigious, 12-week
equestrian event held annually from January through April in Wellington, Florida. Dr. Weltz
completed the registration form and paid Stony Hill the required $10,000 deposit for Oliver and
Copyright to compete at the WEF.
22. Ms. Ali subsequently indicated to Dr. Weltz that Oliver required a second
horse if he was going to be competitive in the jumper classes at WEF and other shows on the

circuit. Ms. Ali also advised Dr. Weltz that Oliver would need a second horse to act as an
alternate in the event that Copyright became sick or injured.
23. Dr. Weltz did not have any intention of purchasing a second horse for
Oliver prior to the recommendation by Ms. Ali. Ms. Ali was aware that Dr. Weltz did not intend
to purchase a second horse prior to making the commitment for Oliver to ride at WEF.
24. At Ms. Ali’s urging, however, Dr. Weltz hired Stony Hill to act as her
agent for the identification, evaluation, and potential purchase of a competitive show jumper for
her son.
25. Dr. Weltz trusted Ms. Ali’s judgment, and relied on her advice that Oliver
required a second horse to be competitive in the jumper classes at WEF and other shows on the
circuit.
26. Dr. Weltz hired Stony Hill to act as agent for the identification and
evaluation of a suitable horse because defendants, as professionals in the equine industry, had
many connections within the horse market and could offer their expertise concerning a horse’s
suitability to achieve Oliver’s needs and competition goals.
27. The intention of the purchase was clear to defendants. Dr. Weltz wished
to purchase a horse for the purpose of competitive jumping by her son.
28. Defendants were aware and required that the horse ultimately purchased
by Dr. Weltz pursuant to their agreement would be stabled at Stony Hill for training, instruction,

29. In accordance with the above, on November 25, 2013, Dr. Weltz executed
an “Equine Purchase Trial Authorization Form” with Stony Hill (the “Authorization”). A copy
of the November 25, 2013 Authorization is attached as Exhibit A.

30. As required by the Authorization, Dr. Weltz forwarded to Stony Hill a
non-refundable deposit of $1,000.00 to “try a horse at Stony Hill.” Pursuant to the
Authorization, the deposit would be credited toward the “next trial” in the event that “the horse
was not suitable.” The Authorization specifically contemplated the disclosure of a “complete vet
report.”
31. The Authorization required Stony Hill to apply the non-refundable deposit
to boarding, training and the balance of the first month’s board after a horse was purchased.
32. Stony Hill, through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms.
Ali, did not locate or present any horse for Oliver to “try” at Stony Hill as contractually agreed to
by the parties. Instead, Ms. Ali recommended that Dr. Weltz consider a horse named “That’s It
3” that Oliver had previously ridden earlier that summer. Ms. Ali scheduled a trial ride at the
stable where the horse was located for the afternoon of December 6, 2013.
33. On the morning of the visit, Ms. Ali informed Dr. Weltz that That’s It 3
had been sold that very morning. It was subsequently learned that, in fact, That’s It 3 was sold
days prior to the visit, on December 1, 2013. Upon information and belief, Ms. Ali was aware
that That’s It 3 was sold on December 1, 2013.
34. Ms Ali represented that there were other horses at the stable that would be
suitable as competitive jumpers for Oliver, including the horse “Greaves De Regor (“Vigo”),” a
horse that Ms. Ali represented as a “brother” of That’s It 3. Upon information and belief, Ms.
Ali was aware that Vigo and That’s It 3 were unrelated by blood.
35. Stony Hill, through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms. Ali, located and

presented Vigo as a suitable competitive jumper for Dr. Weltz’ son.

36. Stony Hill, through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms.
Ali, represented to Dr. Weltz that Vigo was suitable for the intended purpose of a competitive
show jumper for Dr. Weltz’ son and, because Vigo was a young horse, would have the ability to
successfully compete for many years as Oliver advanced to higher levels of competition.
37. After a trial ride by Oliver, and based on defendants’ recommendation, Dr.
Weltz agreed to move forward with the purchase of Vigo. Dr. Weltz authorized defendants to
arrange for a pre-purchase examination of the horse in order to assure that Vigo did not suffer
from any illnesses or physical defects.
38. The purpose of a pre-purchase examination is to help provide the buyer
with enough information to make an informed decision as to whether a horse will meet their
needs. A pre-purchase examination can help the buyer avoid buying a horse that requires
expensive maintenance for a pre-existing condition.
39. It was understood that defendants, as Dr. Weltz’ agents, would arrange for
and oversee the pre-purchase examination, and would notify Dr. Weltz of any concerns or
problems uncovered during the examination.
40. Defendants understood that Dr. Weltz would rely on defendants’ expertise
in evaluating whether the pre-purchase examination results were satisfactory in order to move
forward with the purchase of Vigo.

The Pre-Purchase Examination of Vigo

41. In December 2013, Stony Hill through its agents, servants, and/or

employees including Ms. Ali, contacted Miller & Associates, an equine veterinary practice, on
behalf of Dr. Weltz to schedule a pre-purchase examination of Vigo.

42. On or about December 11, 2013, Dr. Erica Rosen of Miller & Associates
conducted the pre-purchase examination of Vigo for the benefit of Dr. Weltz and with the intent
that Dr. Weltz would rely upon the findings of the examination in determining whether Vigo was
a suitable purchase.
43. Dr. Rosen was informed that Stony Hill was acting as Dr. Weltz’ agent on
the purchase of Vigo.
44. Dr. Rosen conducted a thorough clinical and musculoskeletal examination,
as well as a moving evaluation in hand and under saddle. She also took a full pre-purchase set of
radiographs and drew blood for complete blood count, blood chemistry testing and drug
screening.
45. The pre-purchase examination uncovered several physical ailments,
including “shivers” and a “right hind lameness.” The results of Dr. Rosen’s examination are
recorded on a “Pre-Purchase Examination Report.”
46. The pre-purchase examination report indicates that Stony Hill was acting
as “agent for buyer.”
47. The pre-purchase examination report disclosed, among other things, the
following concerns:

 

– Clinical Findings: “Shivers in all four limbs, though worst in right front.”

– “Vigo is affected by ‘shivers’ in all four limbs, most notably in the right front.”

– “It is difficult to get [Vigo] to lift the right front while standing, which impedes full examination of the limb.”

– Vigo’s condition “may pose some management complications (veterinary evaluation, farrier work, etc.).

– Mild to moderately positive flexion tests.

– Moving Evaluation: Grade 1/5 in right hind when at the trot on straight, circling right, and under tack.

– “Based on the age of the horse and the intended use, it was recommended that Vigo be re-checked in one week.”

– On re-check examination on December 17, Vigo “remained mildly weak right hind under certain tests.”

 

48. Shivers is a chronic nervous or neuromuscular syndrome in horses. The
horse experiences involuntary muscle spasms or tremors in the pelvis, limbs, and tail. Shivers is
most noticeable when the horse’s limbs are picked up.
49. The prognosis for affected horses is generally poor because the disease is
usually slowly progressive. In a horse with shivers, the tendency is for the spasms to increase in
both frequency and severity. The long-term prognosis for athletic function is grave. Eventually,
shivers may result in death or euthanasia because of profound weakness, muscle wasting, and
apparent discomfort, and incapacitation associated with episodic muscle cramping. See, e.g.,
Stephanie Valberg DVM, University of Minnesota Equine Center and John Baird BVsc. PhD,
Ontario Veterinary College, University at Guelph, available at http://www.cvm.umn.edu
/umec/lab/shivers/home.html.
50. There is no cure for shivers.
51. Upon information and belief, Dr. Rosen discussed Vigo’s condition with
Ms. Ali at length, and requested Dr. Weltz’ contact information so that they could speak directly.
Ms. Ali refused to provide Dr. Weltz’ direct contact information to Dr. Rosen, indicating that she
was acting as Dr. Weltz’ agent and would disclose the information to her.
52. In addition to shivers, at the time of the December 11, 2013 examination,
Vigo displayed a right hind lameness.
53. Based on the age of the horse and the intended use, Dr. Rosen
recommended that Vigo be re-checked in one week.

54. At the conclusion of the December 11, 2013 examination, Dr. Weltz was
advised by Stony Hill through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms. Ali that the
horse, Vigo, was sound, healthy, and possessed no physical defects. Ms. Ali further advised Dr.
Weltz that she was waiting for the results of the blood work.
55. Several days later, Ms. Ali advised Dr. Weltz that there was a delay in
receiving the results of the blood work, but that it would be received in short term.
56. Dr. Weltz was never informed that Dr. Rosen requested a follow-up
examination because of the right hind lameness.
57. On December 17, 2013, Dr. Rosen re-checked Vigo to determine whether
the right hind lameness had improved. The horse remained mildly weak on the right hind leg
under certain tests.
58. The right hind lameness posed a risk associated with future soundness of
the horse. This was disclosed in the pre-purchase examination report.
59. Dr. Rosen also discussed this finding with Ms. Ali at length, in order for
her to disclose the information to Dr. Weltz.
60. Upon information and belief, Dr. Rosen received the results of Vigo’s
blood chemistry and drug screening on or about December 16, 2013. There was no inordinate
delay in receiving the results, nor were there any issues in processing the tests.
61. Upon information and belief, Dr. Rosen communicated to Ms. Ali the
results of the blood chemistry and drug screening on December 16, 2013 and emailed the results
on December 17, 2013. The results were unremarkable.
62. The pre-purchase examination report was emailed by Dr. Rosen to Ms. Ali.

63. On December 17, 2013, Ms. Ali emailed Dr. Weltz’s representative to
inform him that there was “great news” and that the results of Vigo’s blood work were “clean.”
Ms. Ali asked Dr. Weltz’ representative to call her to discuss “the next move.”
64. Ms. Ali emailed the blood work results and Vigo’s radiographs to Mr.
Breen. Ms. Ali did not attach a copy of the pre-purchase examination report that was emailed to
her by Dr. Rosen.
65. At the completion of the pre-purchase examination, Dr. Weltz was advised
by Stony Hill through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms. Ali that the horse,
Vigo, was sound, healthy, and possessed no physical defects.
66. At the completion of the pre-purchase examination, Dr. Weltz was advised
by Stony Hill through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms. Ali that the horse,
Vigo, was suitable for competitive jumping.
67. At the completion of the pre-purchase examination, Dr. Weltz was advised
by Stony Hill through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms. Ali that the horse,
Vigo, was suitable for competitive jumping by a child, Dr. Weltz’ son.
68. At the completion of the pre-purchase examination, when Dr. Weltz’s
representative inquired to Stony Hill, through its agents, servants, and/or employees including
Ms. Ali whether it was possible to negotiate a lower purchase price for the horse, Ms. Ali stated
that insofar as the pre-purchase examination disclosed no health problems whatsoever, there was
no basis for negotiation.
69. At the completion of the pre-purchase examination, Ms. Ali represented to
Dr. Weltz that the $130,000 purchase price represented the full value of the horse. Ms Ali

further represented that the seller, not Dr. Weltz, would be responsible for Stony Hill’s
commission.
70. When Dr. Weltz’ representative inquired whether it was possible to
explore other suitable horses at WEF, Ms. Ali stated that Dr. Weltz would be vulnerable to
unscrupulous sellers that might, for example, drug a horse to mask an injury.
71. Ms. Ali represented to Dr. Weltz that she should proceed with the
purchase immediately, as there were other persons interested in purchasing the horse.
72. In reliance upon defendants’ representations that Vigo was sound, healthy,
possessed no physical defects, and was suitable as a competitive jumper, Dr. Weltz purchased
the horse, Vigo, as a competitive jumper for her son.
73. At no time prior to Dr. Weltz’ purchase of the horse did defendants advise
Dr. Weltz that Vigo was affected by shivers and/or displayed a right hind lameness during the
pre-purchase examination.
74. At no time prior to Dr. Weltz’ purchase of the horse did defendants
disclose to Dr. Weltz that Dr. Rosen requested a follow-up examination to determine the extent
of the right hind lameness displayed by the horse Vigo at the initial examination.
75. Following the purchase, Vigo was shipped to Stony Hill Stables in
Amagansett, New York.
76. There was an understanding that Stony Hill, through its agents, servants,
and/or employees including Ms. Ali, would arrange for mortality insurance or major medical
coverage for Vigo on behalf of Dr. Weltz.

77. Stony Hill, through its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms.
Ali, coordinated and arranged for mortality insurance or major medical coverage for Copyright
and the three leased horses on behalf of Dr. Weltz.
78. On January 5, 2014, one day before Vigo was to be shipped to Florida for
the WEF, Dr. Weltz expressed her concern to Ms. Ali that she had not received any information
on mortality insurance or major medical coverage for Vigo.
79. Ms. Ali represented that Vigo was still covered under the previous
owner’s insurance policy, and that Dr. Weltz would be unable to obtain insurance for Vigo until
the change of ownership had been recognized by the United States Equestrian Federation. Ms.
Ali represented and promised that she would coordinate and arrange for Vigo’s insurance policy
so that there was no lapse in coverage.

Plaintiff’s Discovery of Vigo’s Condition

80. In February 2014, Vigo suffered an injury of unknown cause to his left
hind leg while in the care of Stony Hill, its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms. Ali.
81. During the course of treating and investigating the injury, in April, Dr.
Weltz learned from a third-party that Vigo was affected by shivers in all four limbs. In addition,
Dr. Weltz learned that Stony Hill, its agents, servants, and/or employees including Ms. Ali, were
aware of the condition prior to Dr. Weltz’ purchase of the horse.
82. After several discussions with Miller & Associates, Dr. Weltz finally
received the pre-purchase examination report in late April 2014.
83. Upon receiving the report in April 2014, Dr. Weltz learned for the first
time that defendants had grossly misrepresented the condition of the horse prior to the purchase

in December 2013.

84. Upon receiving the report in April 2014, Dr. Weltz learned for the first
time that defendants were aware that Vigo was affected by shivers in all four limbs prior to Dr.
Weltz’ purchase of the horse.
85. Upon receiving the report in April 2014, Dr. Weltz learned for the first
time that defendants were aware that Vigo displayed a right hind lameness prior to Dr. Weltz’
purchase of the horse.
86. In addition, following Vigo’s injury, Dr. Weltz received the insurance
policy for Vigo. Upon reading the policy description, Dr. Weltz learned that the mortality
coverage for Vigo was $100,000.00, not the $130,000.00 purchase price. Dr. Weltz also learned
that there was an exclusion for Vigo’s left hind injury.
87. Believing both issues were in error, Dr. Weltz’ representative called the
insurance company and learned that Stony Hill failed to procure mortality and/or major medical
insurance coverage for the horse Vigo prior to the time of his injury. Dr. Weltz learned that Ms.
Ali attempted to obtain full coverage for Vigo on February 19, 2014, a week after Vigo’s injury,
representing to the insurance company that the horse was sound. The insurance company
investigated the representation and learned that Vigo had suffered the injury to his left hind leg.
88. Dr. Weltz also learned that Stony Hill and Ms. Hotchkiss were aware that
insurance had not been obtained for Vigo, but failed to inform Dr. Weltz of the issue. Upon
information and belief, both Ms. Hotchkiss and Ms. Ali spoke to the insurance company
regarding the insurance lapse.
89. As a result of the failure to procure insurance as promised, Dr. Weltz
became fully responsible for all medical expenses that resulted from Vigo’s left hind leg injury.

90. But for defendants failure to procure insurance as promised, the medical
expenses related to Vigo’s left hind leg injury would have been covered by major medical
insurance.
91. Upon learning of defendants’ failure to procure insurance for Vigo,
defendants agreed to pay a portion of the medical expenses related to Vigo’s injury.
92. Vigo’s medical bills and rehabilitation fees are continuing in nature.
93. Dr. Weltz has recently learned that Ms. Ali was never certified as a trainer
by the USHJA, despite defendants representations to the contrary.
94. The horse Vigo’s physical ailments and defects, including shivers and
right hind lameness, render him a significant management problem. For example, Vigo requires
veterinary care above and beyond that of an ordinary horse, including the need for sedation for
routine blacksmith appointments.
95. The horse Vigo’s physical ailments and defects, including shivers and the
right hind lameness, render him unusable at the present time for competitive jumping for a child.
96. The horse Vigo’s physical ailments and defects, including shivers and the
right hind lameness, render him unusable for investment.
97. Had Dr. Weltz been aware that the horse Vigo suffered from shivers and a
right hind lameness, Dr. Weltz would not, under any circumstances, have proceeded with the
purchase of Vigo.
98. Since Dr. Weltz’ purchase of the horse, Dr. Weltz has expended
considerable sums for veterinary treatment, daily care and maintenance, show costs and training
of Vigo.

99. Since purchasing Vigo, Stony Hill has invoiced Dr. Weltz considerable
sums for daily care and maintenance, show costs and training of the horse Vigo.
100. Stony Hill never applied the $1000.00 nonrefundable deposit to any board
or training fees as required by the Authorization.

First Cause of Action
(Negligent Misrepresentation As Against All Defendants)

101. Dr. Weltz repeats the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 100 of
the Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
102. Stony Hill, through its agents, servants and/or employees, failed to
exercise reasonable care or competence in obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information
to Dr. Weltz regarding the health, medical condition, value, and suitability of the horse Vigo for
its intended purpose as a competitive show jumper for a child.
103. Ms. Hotchkiss, the owner of Stony Hill, failed to exercise reasonable care
or competence in obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information to Dr. Weltz regarding
the health, medical condition, value, and suitability of the horse Vigo for its intended purpose as
a competitive show jumper for a child.
104. Ms. Ali, the head trainer of Stony Hill, failed to exercise reasonable care
or competence in obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information to Dr. Weltz regarding
the health, medical condition, value and suitability of the horse Vigo for its intended purpose as a
competitive show jumper for a child.
105. Stony Hill, through its agents, servants and/or employees, failed to

exercise reasonable care or competence in obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information
to Dr. Weltz regarding the specific medical conditions uncovered during the pre-purchase

examination of the horse Vigo, including the neurological disorder “shivers” and a right hind
lameness.
106. Ms. Hotchkiss, the owner of Stony Hill, failed to exercise reasonable care
or competence in obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information to Dr. Weltz regarding
the specific medical conditions uncovered during the pre-purchase examination of the horse
Vigo, including the neurological disorder “shivers” and a right hind lameness.
107. Ms. Ali, the head trainer of Stony Hill, failed to exercise reasonable care
or competence in obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information to Dr. Weltz regarding
the specific medical conditions uncovered during the pre-purchase examination of the horse
Vigo, including the neurological disorder “shivers” and a right hind lameness.
108. Defendants intended and had actual knowledge that Dr. Weltz would rely
upon the information disclosed by them regarding the horse Vigo’s health, medical condition and
suitability as a competitive jumping horse for her son in entering into the transaction to purchase
the horse.
109. Dr. Weltz relied on defendants’ representations that the horse Vigo was
sound, healthy, and suitable for a competitive jumping horse for a child in purchasing the horse.
110. As a result of the above material misrepresentations by defendants, Dr.
Weltz has sustained damages in the sum of $130,000.00 (the purchase price of the horse). In
addition, Dr. Weltz has suffered considerable losses related to veterinary treatment, daily care
and maintenance, show costs and training of Vigo. Dr. Weltz’ losses are continuing.

Second Cause of Action
(Breach of Agreement As Against All Defendants)

111. Dr. Weltz repeats the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 110 of
the Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

112. In or about November 2013, Dr. Weltz and Defendants entered into an
agreement related to Dr. Weltz’ purchase of a competitive jumping horse.
113. As part of the agreement, Defendants agreed to act as Dr. Weltz’ agent for
the identification and evaluation of a suitable horse to achieve Dr. Weltz’ needs.
114. In accordance with the above, on November 25, 2013, Dr. Weltz executed
an “Equine Purchase Trial Authorization Form” with Stony Hill (the “Authorization”) (attached
as Exhibit A).
115. As required by the Authorization, Dr. Weltz forwarded to Stony Hill a
non-refundable deposit of $1,000.00 to “try a horse at Stony Hill.”
116. Pursuant to the Authorization, the deposit would be credited toward the
“next trial” in the event that “the horse was not suitable.” The Authorization specifically
indicated that there would be a disclosure of a “complete vet report.”
117. The Authorization required Stony Hill to apply the non-refundable deposit
to boarding, training and the balance of the first month’s board after a horse was purchased.
118. Defendants located and presented the horse Vigo as a suitable competitive
jumper for Dr. Weltz’ son.
119. Defendants breached their agreement with Dr. Weltz by representing that
the horse Vigo was sound, healthy, and suitable for competitive jumping for a child when, in
fact, the horse suffered from a chronic, progressive neurological disorder and a right hind
lameness.
120. Defendants breached their agreement with Dr. Weltz by failing to disclose the results

of the pre-purchase examination and by failing to disclose the pre-purchase examination report.

121. Dr. Weltz was denied the benefit of her bargain in that the agreement
contemplated the purchase of a sound, healthy horse suitable for competitive jumping for a child.
In fact, Dr. Weltz purchased a horse affected by a chronic, progressive neurological disorder and
a right hind lameness.
122. Stony Hill further breached its agreement with Dr. Weltz by failing to
apply the $1000.00 nonrefundable deposit to any board or training fees as required by the
Authorization.
123. As a direct and proximate result of defendants’ breaches of their
contractual obligations, Dr. Weltz has sustained damages in the sum of $130,000.00, as well as
considerable losses related to veterinary treatment, daily care, and maintenance, show costs and
training of Vigo. Dr. Weltz’ damages are continuing.

 

Click Here to continue reading complaint

 

Stony Hill Answer

 

May 2015

PARTIAL STIPULATION OF DISCONTINUANCE AS TO DEFENDANTS
STONY HILL STABLES, INC. AND ELIZABETH HOTCHKISS

Parties settled for $47,500

 

Vet exam

Aisha Ali-Duyck Answer

 

May 2016

$76,912.71 Default Judgment entered against defendant Aisha Ali-Duyck