David L. Mazaroli (DM-3929) 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

11 Park Place – Suite 1214 

New York, NY 10007-2801 

Tel. (212)267-8480 

Fax. (212)732-7352 

e-mail: dlm@mazarolilaw.com 

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

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

VIGILANT INSURANCE COMPANY; 

 

 Plaintiff, 

 - against - 

BAX GLOBAL INC.; BAX GLOBAL; 

BAX GLOBAL (AUST) PTY LTD.; 

 Defendants. 

: 

 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

ECF CASE 

07 Civ. 3373 (SHS) 

COMPLAINT 

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

 Plaintiff, through its undersigned attorney, alleges as follows for its complaint 

against defendants:

 1. Plaintiff Vigilant Insurance Company (“Vigilant”) is a New York 

corporation with its principal place of business in New Jersey and a place of business at 

55 Water Street, New York, NY. Vigilant sues herein as subrogated insurer of the cargo 

in suit, having paid the insurance claim of Pfizer Australia Pty. Limited, and for and on 

behalf of the shipper, consignee and owner of the cargo, as their interests may now or 

hereafter appear. 

 2. Defendants are believed to be corporations organized under the laws of, 

and with their principal places of business in, certain of the fifty states or foreign 

sovereigns. 

Case 1:07-cv-03373-SHS Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 1 of 4
3. This Court has jurisdiction over the persons of the defendants, who 

conduct business in the State of New York and the United States as a whole. 

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

4. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 3 of 

this complaint. 

5. This Court has federal question subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 

USCA 1331. There is also pendent, ancillary and supplemental jurisdiction as to certain 

aspects of the claim in suit. 

6. This cause of action arises under a treaty of the United States, specifically 

the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International

Transportation by Air, 49 Stat. 3000, T.S. No. 876 (1934) reprinted in note following 49 

U.S.C. Sec. 1502 (the "Warsaw Convention"), and certain amendments thereto. 

7. This action involves loss and damage to a shipment of pharmaceuticals, 

including lipitor 80mg bulk tablets, which moved, or were intended to move, from San 

Juan, Puerto Rico, to Sydney, Australia, as described more fully in BAX Global air 

waybill 39072283 dated on or about June 21, 2005, and others. (BAX Claim: 06080590) 

8. Said loss and damage was the result of defendants' fault, wanton neglect, 

and willful misconduct in that defendants, their agents, servants, connecting carriers, 

subcontractors, terminal operators, truck drivers, warehousemen and employees failed to 

properly receive, handle, carry, protect and care for the cargo in question and in that 

defendants had no proper and effective procedures to receive, handle, carry, care for the 

cargo. 

9. By reason of the aforesaid plaintiff, and those on whose behalf it sues, has 

sustained damages in the amount of $237,930.22 part of which has been paid although 

duly demanded. 

2 

Case 1:07-cv-03373-SHS Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 2 of 4
10. Plaintiff sues herein on its own behalf and as agent and trustee for and on 

behalf of anyone else who may now have or hereafter acquire an interest in this action. 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

11. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 

through 10 of this complaint. 

12. Defendants' air waybills were not issued in a timely manner and did not 

comply with, or contain all the particulars required by, the Warsaw Convention, 

including Article 8. 

13. Therefore, pursuant to the Warsaw Convention, including Article 9, 

defendants may not avail themselves of the provisions of the Convention which allegedly 

exclude or limit their liability. 

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 

14. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1,2,3,5,7,8,9 

and 10 of this complaint. 

15. When the cargo was received into the care, custody and control of 

defendants, or those entities acting on their behalf, the cargo was in good order and 

condition. However, defendants failed to make delivery of the entire cargo at the 

intended destination in the same order and condition. Instead certain items of cargo were 

determined to have been damaged while in the care, custody and control of defendants. 

16. Therefore, defendants, as common carriers, bailees, and/or warehousemen 

for hire are liable to plaintiff for the claimed loss and damage to the cargo in suit. 

WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands judgment against defendants: 

(a) for the sum of $237,930.22; 

 (b) for prejudgment interest at the rate of 9% per annum; 

(c) for the costs and disbursements of this action; 

3 

Case 1:07-cv-03373-SHS Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 3 of 4
4 

 (d) for such other and further relief as this Court deems 

 proper and just. 

Date: New York, New York 

 April 26, 2007 

 LAW OFFICES, 

 DAVID L. MAZAROLI 

 s/David L. Mazaroli 

 _____________________________ 

 David L. Mazaroli (DM 3929) 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 11 Park Place - Suite 1214 

 New York, New York 10007 

 Tel.: (212)267-8480 

 Fax.: (212)732-7352 

 E-mail: dlm@mazarolilaw.com 

 File No.: 6C-1365 

Case 1:07-cv-03373-SHS Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 4 of 4