IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

DEBRA NICHOLL-KENNER 

Plaintiff, 

VS. 

LAWRENCEVILLE UROLOGY, P.A. : CIVIL ACTION: 

NO.: 3: 11-cv-00195 

and 

PREMIER UROLOGY 

and 

JULIE PRETTYMAN 

Defendants, 

Amended Answer of Defendants, Premier Urology Associates, LLC, 

Lawrenceville Urolo2y, P.A. and Julie Prettyman to Plaintiffs Complaint 

1. This is an introductory paragraph to which no response is required. 

2. Admitted. 

3. Admitted this Court has personal jurisdiction over defendants. 

4. Admitted. 

5. This is an incorporation to which no response is required. 

6. Admitted. 

7. Admitted in part, denied in part. Lawrenceville Urology, P.A. is a Urology practice 

not a medical facility. It has an in-house research facility. It is not a subsidiary of Premier. 

8. Admitted in part, denied in part. Premier was responsible for paying plaintiff. It 

did not acquire Lawrenceville as an entity. 

Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 9-4 Filed 04/08/11 Page 2 of 8 PageID: 54 Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 12 Filed 04/20/11 Page 1 of 7 PageID: 66
9. Admitted. 

10. This is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 

11. This is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 

12. This is an incorporation to which no response is required 

13. Admitted. 

14. Admitted. 

15. Denied. As a research coordinator, plaintiff was a professional and was required to 

have training in medical research practices. 

16. Admitted. 

17. Denied as stated. Plaintiff did supervise secretaries and other staff. 

18. Admitted. 

19. Admitted. 

20. Admitted in part, denied in part. Admitted plaintiff was not paid overtime. 

Plaintiff was allotted 10 days of Personal Time. Denied plaintiff was required to make up time. 

21. Denied. 

22. Denied. 

23. Denied as stated. Plaintiff was not entitled to overtime because she was an exempt 

professional employee and/or administrative employee. 

24. Defendant is without information to either admit or deny this allegation and the 

same is therefore denied. 

25. Defendant is without information to either admit or deny this allegation and the 

same is therefore denied. 

26. Denied. Defendant Prettyman had asked plaintiff to tell her when the surgery 

-2- 

Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 9-4 Filed 04/08/11 Page 3 of 8 PageID: 55 Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 12 Filed 04/20/11 Page 2 of 7 PageID: 67
would take place so she could prepare for plaintiff’s absence. Plaintiff told defendant Prettyman 

the day before she left for surgery that the surgery would be months away; the next day she 

advised she would be having the surgery and would be taking several months off. 

27. Admitted. 

28. This is a conclusion of law to which no response is required. 

29. Denied. 

30. Denied. 

31. Denied. 

32. Denied. 

33. It is admitted only that Premier terminated the Plaintiff on November 10, 2010. 

The remaining allegations in this paragraph are conclusions of law to which no response is 

required. 

34. Denied as stated. Plaintiff was terminated because the number of subjects did not 

justify three research coordinators and plaintiff had the least seniority of the three. 

35. Denied that defendant posted any job offering or that it is now or has since 

plaintiff was terminated looking to replace her. 

36. Denied. 

37. This is an incorporation to which no response is required. 

38. Admitted. 

39. Admitted. 

40. Denied. 

41. Denied. 

42. Denied. 

Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 9-4 Filed 04/08/11 Page 4 of 8 PageID: 56 Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 12 Filed 04/20/11 Page 3 of 7 PageID: 68
43. This is an incorporation to which no response is required. 

44. Denied. 

45. Denied. Plaintiff was a professional and/or administrative employee. 

46. Denied. Plaintiff was a professional research coordinator. 

47. Admitted. 

48. Admitted. 

49. Admitted. 

50. Denied. 

51. Denied. 

52. This is an incorporation to which no response is required. 

53. Denied. 

54. Denied. 

55. Denied. Plaintiff was a professional research coordinator. 

56. Denied. 

57. Denied. 

58. Admitted. 

59. Denied. 

60. Denied. 

61. This is an incorporation to which no response is required. 

62. Admitted. 

63. Denied. 

64. Denied. 

65. Denied. 

-4- 

Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 9-4 Filed 04/08/11 Page 5 of 8 PageID: 57 Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 12 Filed 04/20/11 Page 4 of 7 PageID: 69
66. This is an incorporation to which no response is required. 

67. Denied. 

68. Denied. 

69. Denied as stated. Plaintiff was able to perform her job function. 

70. Denied. 

71. Denied. 

WHEREFORE defendants demand judgment in their favor together with costs and 

attorneys fees. 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

72. The plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 

73. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the plaintiff has failed to state a 

claim for attorney’s fees upon which relief can be granted. 

74. The plaintiff’s requests for relief are contrary to the public policy of the State of 

New Jersey. 

75. The Plaintiff has failed to act reasonably. 

76. The Plaintiff ’s claims are barred by the equitable maxims. 

77. The Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of laches. 

78. The Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of waiver. 

79. The Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of estoppel. 

80. The Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of judicial estoppel. 

81. To the extent that the Plaintiff has suffered damages, which is specifically denied, 

the Plaintiff has failed to mitigate her damages. 

82. Julie Prettyman has no personal or individual liability for plaintiff’s claims. 

-5- 

Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 9-4 Filed 04/08/11 Page 6 of 8 PageID: 58 Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 12 Filed 04/20/11 Page 5 of 7 PageID: 70
83. The Plaintiff was terminated because the number of subjects did not justify three 

research coordinators and the Plaintiff had the least seniority of the three. 

84. At all relevant times, the Plaintiff was an exempt administrative employee. 

85. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, at all relevant times, the Plaintiff 

was an exempt administrative employee as defined by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 

U.S.C. § 201, etgJ"FLSA"), the New Jersey State Wage and Hour Law, N.J.S.A. 34:11-56a, 

et igq. ("NJSWHL"), the regulations implementing the foregoing statutes, and other sources 

interpreting the foregoing statutes. 

86. At all relevant times, the Plaintiff was an exempt professional employee. 

87. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, at all relevant times, the Plaintiff 

was an exempt professional employee as defined by the FLSA, the NJSWHL, the regulations 

implementing the foregoing statutes, and other sources interpreting the foregoing statutes. 

88. At all relevant times, the Defendants acted in good faith. 

89. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, at all relevant times, the 

Defendants acted in good faith as defined by the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 

U.S.C. § 2601, et q, the FLSA, the NJSWHL, the Portal-to-Portal Act, 29 U.S.C. § 251, et 

the regulations implementing those statutes, and opinions interpreting those statutes. 

90. The plaintiff has failed to state a claim because she was not an eligible employee 

(as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 2611 and the regulations implementing the FMLA) and the plaintiffs 

employer was not a covered employer (as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 2611 and the regulations 

implementing the FMLA). 

91. Defendants reserve the right to supplement and amend these affirmative defenses 

as this case proceeds. 

in 

Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 9-4 Filed 04/08/11 Page 7 of 8 PageID: 59 Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 12 Filed 04/20/11 Page 6 of 7 PageID: 71
SHERMAN, SILVERSTEIN, KOHL, 

ROSE & PODOLSKY, P.A. 

Alan C. Milstein, Esquire 

308 Harper Drive, Suite 200 

Moorestown, NJ 08057 

Telephone: (856) 662-0700 

FAX: (856) 488-4744 

Attorneys for Defendants, Premier Urology 

Associates, LLC, Lawrenceville Urology, P.A. 

and Julie Prettyman 

By: 

DATE: 

-7- 

Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 9-4 Filed 04/08/11 Page 8 of 8 PageID: 60 Case 3:11-cv-00195-MLC -DEA Document 12 Filed 04/20/11 Page 7 of 7 PageID: 72