Answer To ComplaintResponseCal. Super. - 6th Dist.May 4, 2018w o < Q Oo w n A o o H. Gregory Nelch, Esq. - SBN 118258 Rebecca D. Martino, Esq. - SBN 236094 CODDINGTON, HICKS & DANFORTH A Professional Corporation, Lawyers 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 300 Redwood City, CA 94065-2133 Tel: 650.592.5400 Fax: 650.592.5027 ATTORNEYS FOR Defendant Nagappan Rathinam IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA SEAN STEVENSON, Case No. 18CV327760 Plaintiff, ANSWER TO COMPLAINT VS. NAGAPPAN RATHINAM, and DOES 1 to 50, Inclusive, Defendants. COME NOW defendant, Nagappan Rathinam, and in response to the unverified complaint of plaintiff, Sean Stevenson, on file herein, herewith denies each and every, all and singular, the allegations therein contained, and in this connection, defendant denies that plaintiff has been injured or damaged in any of the sums mentioned in the complaint, or in any sum whatsoever or at all, as a result of any act or omission ofthis answering defendant. AS A FURTHER, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that said complaint, and each cause of action thereof, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering defendant. /1/ /// Answer to ComplaintCase No: 18CV327760 524443 Ww ) O o 0 3 O N W n AS A SECOND, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff was himself careless and negligent in and about the matters alieged in the complaint; that said carelessness and negligence on plaintiff's own part proximately contributed to the happening ofthe incident and to the injuries, loss and damage complained of, if any there were; that should plaintiff recover damages, defendant is entitled to have the amountthereof abated, reduced or eliminated to the extent that plaintiff's negligence caused or contributed to his injuries,if any. AS A THIRD, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendantalleges that plaintiff acted with full knowledge ofall the facts and circumstances surrounding his injuries and assumed the risk of the mattets causing his injuries, and that said matters of which plaintiff assumed the risk proximately conttibuted to the happening of the incident at bar and proximately caused his injuries,if any. AS A FOURTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that named or unnamed third parties were careless and negligent in and about the matters alleged in the complaint; that said carelessness and negligence of said named or unnamed third parties proximately contributed to the happening of the incident and to the injuries, loss and damage complained of by plaintiff, if any there were; that should plaintiff recover damages, this answering defendant is entitled to have the amount thereof abated, reduced or eliminated to the extent that said named or unnamed third parties’ negligence caused or contributed to plaintiffs injuries,if any. AS A FIFTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TC THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff failed subsequent to the occurrence described in the complaint properly to mitigate his damages and thereby is precluded from recovering those damages which could have reasonably been avoided by the exercise of due care on the part of plaintiff. /17 /7/ Answer to Complaint Case No: 18CV327760 524443 W w N o = O o 0 3 O N D n 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 28 AS A SIXTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answeting defendant alleges that plaintiff's complaint, and each cause of action thereof, is batred by the applicable period oflimitations including, but not limited to, limitations codified in California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 and California Code of Civil Procedure § 338. AS A SEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answeting defendant alleges thatat the time ofthe injuries alleged in the complaint, plaintiff was employed and was entitled to, and did receive, workers’ compensation benefits. Defendantis informed and thereon believes thatif the conditionsas alleged in plaintiff's complaint are found to exist, plaintiff's employer was negligent and careless in and about the matters referred to in said complaint and that said negligence on the part of the employer proximately caused or contributed to the injuries and damages,if any, complained of by plaintiff and by that reason thereof, defendant is entitled to set-off any compensation benefits received or to be received by plaintiff against any judgment which may be rendered in favor of plaintiff herein. AS AN EIGHTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that said complaintis barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. AS A NINTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that said complaint is barred by the doctrine of laches. AS A TENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that said complaint is barred by the doctrines of waiver and estoppel. AS AN ELEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that he is entitled to an offset for all monies received by plaintiff from payments received from any source. /1/ Answer to ComplaintCase No: 18CV327760 524443 ~ A N W h + a U 2 o o AS A TWELFTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN, this answering defendant alleges the damagesthat the plaintiff claims to have suffered were caused or made worse by an intervening or superseding cause Or circumstances. AS A THIRTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff has failed to ptopetly name ot join an indispensable or necessary party or parties to the present action; as a result of such failure to join, complete relief cannot be accorded to those already parties to the action and result in prejudice to the defendant, in any possible future litigation. AS A FOURTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff's claims are barred, in whole or in patt, because some or all ofthe parties have been improperly joined in this action. AS A FIFTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges on information and belief that plaintiff failed to catry health insurance on the day ofthe incident alleged in the complaint, ot after the incident, and therefore failed to propetly mitigate his damages and thereby is precluded from recovering those damages which could have reasonably been avoided by the exercise of due care on the part of plaintiff. AS A SIXTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ONFILE HEREIN,this answering defendantis entitled to, and claims the benefit of, all defenses and presumptions set forth in or arising from any rule of law or statute in this state. AS A SEVENTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendantalleges that if plaintiff recovers damages from this answering defendant, this answering defendantis entitled to indemnification, either in whole or in part, from all persons or entities whose negligence, fault, or conduct proximately caused or contributed to the damages allegedly incurred by plaintiff. 4 Answer to ComplaintCase No: 18CV327760 524443 J O o 0 N N A N w n B A AS AN EIGHTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant alleges that if this answering defendantis found to be liable for any ofplaintiff's losses and damages, which defendant denies any and all liability, plaintiff should be limited to seek and recover from this answering defendant only that proportion of alleged damages and losses for which this answering defendant is liable and responsible under any applicable theory. AS A NINETEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN,this answering defendant acknowledges that he may have insufficient knowledge ot information on which to form a belief as to whether additional affirmative defenses ate available; therefore, this answering defendant reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses as appropriate. AS A TWENTIETH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT ON FILE HEREIN, these answering defendant alleges that plaintiff failed to carry insurance as required by California Vehicle Code § 16058 and therefore is precluded from recovering specific damages such as general damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3333.4, Proposition 213. WHEREFORE, defendant prays that plaintiff takes nothing against said defendant by his said complaint, and that defendant has judgment for his costs ofsuit herein incurred, together with such other and further relief as may be just and proper. Dated: September 21, 2018 CODDINGTON, HICKS & DANFORTH Nagapp ih Rathinam Answer to Complaint Case No: 18CV327760 524443 o o 0 3 O N OF California Code of Civil Procedure sections 1011, 1013, 1013a, 2015.5 California Rule of Courtrule 2.251 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 5(b) I, the undersigned, declare that I am employed in the County of San Mateo, State of California. I am over the age of eighteen (18) years and not a party to the within action. My business address is 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 300, Redwood City, California 94065. My electronic mail address is Eva@chdiawyers.com. I am readily familiar with my employet’s business practice for collection and processing of correspondence and documents for mailing with the United States Postal Service, mailing via overnight delivery, transmission by facsimile machine, and delivery by hand. On September 21, 2018, I served a copy of each of the documents listed below by placing said copies for processing as indicated herein. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT X United States Mail: The correspondence or documents were placed in sealed, labeled envelopes with postage thereon fully prepaid on the above date placed for collection and mailing at my place of business to be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service at Redwood City, California on this same date in the ordinary course of business. Overnight Delivery: The correspondence or documents were placed in sealed, labeled packaging for overnight delivery, with Federal Express, with all charges to be paid by my employer on the above date for collection at my place of business to be deposited in a facility regularly maintained by the overni fi delivery carrier, or delivered to a courier or driver authorized by the overnight Alter carrier to receive such packages, on this date in the ordinary course of business. Hand Delivery: The correspondence or documents were placed in sealed, labeled envelopes and served by personal delivery to the party or attorney indicated herein, or if upon attorney, by leaving the labeled envelopes with a receptionist or other person having charge of the attorney’s office. Facsimile Transmission: The correspondence or documents were placed for transmission from (650) 592-5027 at Redwood City, California, and were transmitted to a facsimile machine maintained by the party or attorney to be served at the facsimile machine telephone number provided by said patty or attorney, on this same date in the ordinary course of business. The transmission was reported as complete and without error, and a record of the transmission was properly issued by the transmitting facsimile machine. Electronic Transmission: The correspondence or documents were transmitted electronically to the electronic address set forth below. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 State. The recipient has filed and served notice that he or she accepts electronic service; the recipient has electronically filed a document with the court; and/or the Court has mandated that the parties serve documents through its Court approved vendor. The printed form of this document bearing the original signature is on file and available for inspection at the request of the court or any party to the action or proceeding in which it is filed, in the manner provided in California Rule of Court Rule 2.257(a). Federal. The recipient of this electronic service has consented to this method of setvice in writing, a copy of which is on file and available for inspection in my employet’s office. I have received nc indication the electronic transmission did not reach the recipient. PERSONS OR PARTIES SERVED: David Yadidi, Esq. Yadidi Law Firm, PC P.O. Box 261098 Encino, CA 91426 Telephone: (818) 981-3377 Facsimile: (818) 981-3311 E-mail: I certify (or declate) under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on September 21, 2018. Wpr Eva Oliveira Court: Superior Court ofCalifornia, Santa Clara County Action No: 718C1V327760 Case Name: Stevenson v. Rathinam