8535-4\rew

MCCABE & MACK LLP, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, POST OFFICE BOX 509, POUGHKEEPSIE, NY 12602

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF NEW YORK

-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

REED SMITH LLP,

Plaintiff,

-againstLARRY THEW, as beneficiary of and co-trustee of the 

Thew Family Trust; JOHN THEW, as beneficiary of and 

co-trustee of the Thew Family Trust; MELINDA THEW

COOPER, as beneficiary of and co-trustee of the Thew 

Family Trust; and the THEW FAMILY TRUST, Larry 

Thew, John Thew and Melinda Thew Cooper, co-trustees,

Defendant

-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

VERIFIED ANSWER

Index No: 05/101345

Assigned Judge: 

The defendant, Melinda Thew Cooper, by her attorneys, McCabe & Mack LLP, as and

for her verified answer to the amended summons and complaint, respectfully shows to the court

and alleges as follows:

1. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations contained in paragraphs numbered “1”, “2”, “3”, “8”, “9”, “10”, “12” and “15” of the

complaint.

2. Denies those allegations contained in paragraph numbered “6” that Melinda Thew

Cooper is a successor co-trustee and otherwise denies knowledge or information sufficient to

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph “6” of the complaint.

3. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to all allegations

of fact and respectfully refers all questions of law to the Court as to paragraphs numbered “7” and

“14” of the complaint.

Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS Document 34-5 Filed 05/02/2005 Page 1 of 4
8535-4\rew

MCCABE & MACK LLP, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, POST OFFICE BOX 509, POUGHKEEPSIE, NY 12602

4. Denies those allegations contained in paragraph numbered “11” of the complaint.

AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

5. A prior filed action is currently pending in the United States District Court for the

Southern District of New York, in which the plaintiff here has sought the same relief.

AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

6. Venue is not proper in New York County.

AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

7. Plaintiff is not a disinterested stakeholder and therefore cannot bring this

interpleader action.

WHEREFORE, the defendant, Melinda Thew Cooper, demands judgment dismissing the

complaint of the plaintiff herein, plus the costs and disbursements of this action and for such

other and further relief as to the Court may seem just and proper.

DATED: Poughkeepsie, New York

March 9, 2005

Yours, etc.

McCABE & MACK LLP

By: /s/ Karen F. Lesperance 

KAREN F. LESPERANCE

RICHARD R. DUVALL

Attorneys for Defendant Melinda Thew Cooper

63 Washington Street

P.O. Box 509

Poughkeepsie, NY 12602-0509

Tel: (845) 486-6800

TO: William Bagliebter, Esq.

Reed Smith, LLP

599 Lexington Avenue

New York, NY 10022-7650

Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS Document 34-5 Filed 05/02/2005 Page 2 of 4
8535-4\rew

MCCABE & MACK LLP, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, POST OFFICE BOX 509, POUGHKEEPSIE, NY 12602

Kurzman, Eisenberg, Corbin, Lever & Goodman, LLP

One North Broadway

White Plains, NY 10601

Attorneys for Larry Thew and John Thew, co-trustees 

John Thew, as beneficiary of and co-trustee of the Thew Family Trust

Larry Thew, as beneficiary of and co-trustee of Thew Family Trust

Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS Document 34-5 Filed 05/02/2005 Page 3 of 4
8535-4\rew

MCCABE & MACK LLP, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, POST OFFICE BOX 509, POUGHKEEPSIE, NY 12602

ATTORNEY VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW YORK )

) ss.:

COUNTY OF DUTCHESS )

I, the undersigned, am an attorney duly admitted to practice in the courts of New York

State and say that: I am the attorney of record, or of counsel with the attorney(s) of record, for

defendant, Melinda Thew Cooper. I have read the annexed Verified Answer, know the contents

thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to

be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief,

as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following:

review of correspondence, records, and reports in affirmant's possession.

The reason I make this affirmation instead of defendant is that said defendant do(es) not

reside in or maintain an office in the county where affirmant's office is located.

I affirm the foregoing statements are true under penalties of perjury.

DATED: Poughkeepsie, New York

March 9, 2005

 /s/ Karen F. Lesperance

KAREN F. LESPERANCE, ESQ.

Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS Document 34-5 Filed 05/02/2005 Page 4 of 4