Complaint Unlimited Fee AppliesCal. Super. - 6th Dist.March 3, 2021E-FILED 3/3/2021 2:47 PM Clerk of Court Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara 21CV379119 Reviewed By: R. Tien 21CV379119 Fading, Hecht & Davis, LLP ng \OOOQQLII 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ROGER D. HECHT, SBN 118662 FARLING, HECHT & DAVIS LLP 96 North Third Street, Suite 660 San Jose, CA 95 l I2 Phone: 408-295-6100 Fax: 408-299-0396 Attorneys for Plaintiff, MICHELLE KISS SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA MICHELLE KISS, an Individual, Case N03 . . COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Pialntlff, V LIVE NATION WORLDWIDE, INC., and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants. Piaintiff, MICHELLE KISS, alleges as follows: l. The true names 0r capacities, whether individual, emporate, associate, or otherwise of defendants, DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are unknown to plaintiff who therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names, and will ask leave of Court to amend this Complaint when the same have been ascertained; that plaintiff is infoxmed and believes, and upon such information and belief alleges, that each defendant designated herein as “DOB” was responsible, negligently, or in some other actionable manner, for the event and happenings referred to herein, which proximately caused injury and damage t0 plaintiff, as hereinafler alleged. 2. At all times herein mentioned, defendant LIVE NATION WORLDWIDE, INC., hereinafter referred to as "LIVE NATION”, was and now is a corporation, duly organized and existing under and by Viltue of the laws of the State of California, or other states, and authorized to do and engaged in doing business in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. Complaint for Damages l Kiss v. Live Nation Worldwide, Ina. er ai. Case No. FarlinO, Hecht & Davis, LLP \Oooxlm 10 11 12 l3 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. At all times herein mentioned, defendants, LIVE NATION and/or DOE 1 and/or DOE 2 and/or DOE 3, and/or DOE 4 and/or DOE 5, were and now are doing business in the County 0f Santa Clara, State OfCaIifomia. 4. At 311 times herein mentioned, defendants, and each 0f them, were the agents, servants and employees 0f each other and acting within the scope 0f their employment and agency as such. 5. At all times herein mentioned, defendants, LIVE NATION, AND/OR DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, and each 0f them, were the owners, operators, lessors, lessees, managers, caretakers, repairers, designers, contractors, subcontractors, constructors, controllers, and/or maintainers 0f the outdoor area located at 0r near the Beer Shack at the Shoreline Amphitheatre located at I Amphitheatre Pkwy, Mountain View, California, County 0f Santa Clara, State of California, to which the general public was invited t0 come (hereinafter refened t0 as "THE PROPERTY“), within thejurisdiction 0f the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the County 0f Santa Clara. 6. On 0r about August 24, 2019, plaintiff was lawfully 0n the premises 0f said PROPERTY, attending a five music event. 7. At all times herein mentioned, defendants, and each of them, had sole and exclusive custody and controi 0fthe aforesaid PROPERTY and activities occurring at said PROPERTY, and owed a duty t0 this plaintiff and others lawfully 0n said premises t0 keep said premises in a good and safe condition; contraxy thereto, defendants, and each 0f them, were negligent, careless and reckless in the ownership, care, control, design, engineering, construction, maintenance, operation, leasing, management, caretaking, contracting, and subcontracting 0f said premises, in that they caused and permitted said premises t0 be and remain in a dangerous and unsafe condition in that defendants, and each Ofthem, caused 01‘ permitted water t0 emanate from the Beer Shack and accumulate on the ground causing a dangerous and hazardous slip condition. Defendants, and each 0f them were negligent, careless and reckless in that they failed t0 properly warn of the dangerous condition, 01‘ take remedial action t0 safeguard that area of“THE PROPERTY”. Said defendants, and each 0f them, knew 0r should have known in the exercise ofreasonable care, that said walking area was in a dangerous and defective and unsafe condition, and a menace t0 plaintiff and others lawfully 0n said premises. 8. By reason of the aforesaid negligence, carelessness and recklessness of defendants, and each Ofthem, as aforesaid, and as a direct and proximate result thereof, piaintiff, while walking in the vicinity 0f the Beer Shack, was caused t0 and did slip and fall, sustaining the injuries and damages as hereinafter alleged. Complaint for Damages 2 Kiss v. Live Nation World‘xvide, Inc, e! a]. Case No. Farling, Hecht & Davis, LLP AWN KOOOHJQLII 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 9. As a direct and proximate result 0f the negligence, carelessness and recklessness 0f defendants, and each of them, as aforesaid, plaintiff was hurt in her health, strength and activity, sustaining severe shock and injuries to her arms, hands, knees, ankies, and other parts 0f her body, all 0f which said injuries have caused, continue t0 cause, and will in the future cause this plaintiff great physical and emotional pain 311d suffering; plaintiff is informed 3nd believes, and therefore alleges, that said injuries are permanent in nature, all t0 her damage in a sum according t0 proof. 10. As a further direct and proximate result 0fthe negligence 0f defendants, piaintiff was required to and did employ physicians and surgeons to examine, treat and care for her, and did incur, and will continue t0 incur, medical and related expenses, the exact amount 0f which are currently unknown t0 plaintiff, but which will be detemlined in an amount according to proof. 11. As a fimher direct and proximate result 0f the negligence 0f defendants, and each of them, as herein above alleged, plaintiff was prevented from attending t0 her usual occupation, and her earning capacity has been greatly impaired, both in the past and present, resulting in further damage in an amount t0 be detelmined according t0 proof at trial. WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF PRAYS FOR IUDGMENT AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. General damages in an amount t0 be determined according t0 proof; 2. For all medical and speciai damages in an amount t0 be determined according to proof; 3. For loss 0f earnings and earning capacity in an amount to be determined according t0 proof; 4. For costs ofsuit incurred herein; 5. For such other and further relief as this court may deem just and proper. Dated: March w i > , 2021 FARLING, HECHT & DAVIS, LLP By: " , ROGER D. HECHT Attorneys for MICHELLE KISS Complaint for Damages 3 Kiss v. Live Narion Worldwide, Ina, e! a]. Case N0.