To ComplaintResponseCal. Super. - 6th Dist.January 16, 201910 I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 GARRY COHEN, ESQ. State Bar No. 177859 Electronically Filed THE COHEN LAW OFFICE, PC by Superior Court of CA, 1720 S. Amphlett Blvd., Suite 258 County of Sata Clas, San Mateo, CA 94402 on 12015 5:36 AM Tel: (650) 592-8600 Revieswad By: Y. Chavez Case #19CV341848 Fax: (650) 592- ax: (650) 592-20419 Envelope: 2608777 Attorney for Defendants SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA DAVID PRADO, JR., Case No.: 19CV341848 Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER TO Vv. PLAINTIFEF’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT DAVID M. PRADO, ANA MARIA PRADO, RUBY GONZALEZ, PRADO & SON CORPORATION, a California Corporation, ; } . RUBY’S TAQUERIA INC., RUBY’S PAN | Hearing Date: April 30, 2019 DULCE INC. and DOES 1 through 50, Sime; TAO PM inclusive, ep - 5 Defendants. Judge: Hon. Elizabeth Strickland COMES NOW, Defendants David M. Prado, Ana Maria Prado, Ruby Gonzalez, Prado & Son Corporation, a California Corporation, Ruby’s Taqueria Inc., Ruby’s Pan Dulce Inc. (hereinafter "these answering Defendants"), and answering the unverified Complaint For: Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Removal of Defendant Director, Imposition of a Constructive Trust, Common Law Accounting, Unjust Enrichment, Conversion, Statutory Accounting, and Tortious Eviction (hereinafter “Complaint”) on file herein for and on behalf of itself alone, answers Plaintiff's unverified Complaint as follows: Under and pursuant to the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure, specifically, Section 431.30 thereof, these answering Defendants generally denies each and every allegation {00103826.DOCX} ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT I 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 of said unverified Complaint, and the whole thereof, and each and every allegation of each and every cause of action alleged therein, and further expressly deny that as a direct or proximate result of any acts or omissions on the part of these answering Defendants, Plaintiff herein sustained or suffered injury or damage in the amount alleged in the unverified Complaint, or in any amount at all, or that Plaintiff has suffered injury or damage for any reason in the sums alleged in the unverified Complaint, or in any other sum or sums, or at all. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a first, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants allege that Plaintiff's unverified Complaint, in its entirety, nor any purported cause of action set forth therein, allege facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against these answering Defendants. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a second, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants allege that they have incurred damages by reason of Plaintiff's conduct and that it has the right of offset of any amount of monies owed to Plaintiff by way of damages. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a third, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants are informed and believe, and on such information and belief, allege that Plaintiff is engaged in conduct that constitutes waiver of his rights. " {00103826.DOCX} ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a fourth, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants are informed and believe, and on such information and belief, allege that by reason of Plaintiff's conduct which constitutes a breach of contract, tortious conduct, waiver, unclean hands, and laches, Plaintiff is estopped to assert any right of relief. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a fifth, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants are informed and believe, and on such information and belief, allege that Plaintiff breached his contract, if any, with Defendants and by reason of such breach of contract, these answering Defendants has been excused of any duty it may have had to perform any obligation set forth in any agreement with Plaintiff, if there be such an agreement. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As an sixth, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants allege that Plaintiff herein, and each and every cause of action contained in the unverified Complaint, is barred under the doctrine of unclean hands. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a seventh, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein| these answering Defendants allege that Plaintiff herein, and each and every cause of action contained in the unverified Complaint, is barred by reason of acts, omissions, representations, and courses of conduct by Plaintiff, by which these answering Defendants were led to rely on to its detriment, thereby barring each and every cause of action under the Doctrine of Equitable Estoppel. {00103826.DOCX} ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a eighth, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants allege that its full performance of any agreement or act required of it, if there be such agreements or acts, fulfills all its duties and obligations to Plaintiff, if any there be, contractual, fiduciary, or other, and no other duty or obligation to Plaintiff remains on behalf of these answering Defendants. NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As an ninth, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants allege that at all times material herein, Plaintiff failed and neglected to mitigate his damages so as to reduce and/or diminish his claim. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a tenth, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants allege that Plaintiff, by his acts, conduct and/or omissions, has ratified the acts, conduct and omissions, if any, of these answering Defendants; therefore, Plaintiff is barred from seeking any relief from these answering Defendants. ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a eleventh, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants allege that the action of Defendants is barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As a twelfth, separate, and affirmative defense to the unverified Complaint on file herein, these answering Defendants allege that the unverified Complaint, and each and every cause of action therein, is barred by the Doctrine of Integration and the Parole Evidence Rule. {00103826.DOCX} ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 4 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREFORE, these answering Defendants prays for judgment as follows: 1. That Plaintiff take nothing by reason of the unverified Complaint herein, and that these answering Defendants be dismissed hence; 2. To the extent to which law, equity, or contract allows, for reasonable attorney's fees; 3. For costs of suit incurred herein; and 4. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Dated: March 6, 2019 The Cohen Law Office fm flere Garry Gone Attorney for Defendants {00103826.DOCX} ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 5 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 21 28 PROOF OF SERVICE Prado v. Prado et al. (Case No.: 19CV341848) I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to this action. My business address is: 1720 South Amphlett Boulevard, Suite 258 San Mateo, California 94402 On the date specified below, I caused the following documents to be served: DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT (X) (BY MAIL) by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postagg thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at San Mateo, California addressed as set forth below: David Prado, Jr. In ¢/o Martin Deutsch Sosan Akbar Law Offices of Martin Deutsch 152 North Third Street, Suite 800 San Jose, CA 95113 ( ) (BY E-MAIL) Based on court order or agreement of the party(ies) to accept service by e mail, I caused the document(s) to be sent to the person(s) at the email address(es) listed below. 1} did not receive any message or indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. ( ) (BY PERSONAL SERVICE)I caused such envelope(s) to be delivered by hand to thd addressee(s) listed below. I, Shelby Vance, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on March (0. 2019, at San Mateo, California. / Shelly anes N {00103826.DOCX} ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT 6
