Answer Unlimited Fee Applies

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.March 26, 2021

WILMA J. GRAY (State Bar No. 188386) wilma.gray@mcnamaralaw.corn MCNAMARA, NEY, BEATTY. SLATTERY, BORGES & AMBACHER LLP 3480 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 250 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Telephone: (925) 939-5330 Facsimile: (925) 939-0203 Attorneys for Defendant ISAIAH PEOPLES m C IZ m Og& m &a: & & o" [ & z F- ~OP I [ Z m o oo z 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 27 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CIVIL - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION PING LIU, vs. Plaintiff, Case No. 21CV381410 ISAIAH PKOPLKS'SS%'KR TO PLAI'NTIPF'S COMPLAIN f Action Filed: 3/26/2021 ISAIAH PEOPLES, and Does 1 to 50, Defendants. COMES NOW Defendant ISAIAH PEOPLES (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") and in this Answer to Plaintiff's unverified Complaint on file herein, Defendant admits, denies and alleges as follows: Answering the allegations of Plaintiff's Complaint on file herein, this answering Defendant denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the allegations contained in said Complaint, and each and every part thereof, and in this connection this Defendant denies that Plaintiff has been injured or damaged in any sum, or otherwise, or at all, by reason of any carelessness, negligence, act or omission of this answering Defendant. WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays for judgment as hereinafter set forth. AS AND FOR A FIRST, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, this answering Defendant alleges that the Complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering ISAIAH PEOPLES'NSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 7/14/2021 9:35 AM Reviewed By: L Del Mundo Case #21CV381410 Envelope: 6842812 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 25 26 27 Defendant. AS AND FOR A SECOND, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiffwas guilty ofcarelessness, negligence and other wrongful conduct in and about the matters set forth in the Complaint on file herein, and that said carelessness, negligence and other wrongful conduct on the part of said Plaintiffproximately contributed in some degree to the alleged incident and to the damages and injuries, if any, alleged to have been sustained by said Plaintiff and therefore said carelessness, negligence and wrongful conduct completely bars any recovery, or in the alternative, it reduces the right of recovery by that amount which contributed to this incident as set forth under the doctrine of comparative negligence. AS AND FOR A THIRD, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, this answering Defendant alleges that others, including parties and unnamed individuals and entities, were careless and negligent in and about the matters alleged in the Complaint on file herein, and that said carelessness and negligence on the part of said others proximately contributed to the happening of the incident, and to the injuries, loss and damages against this answering Defendant, said Defendant is entitled to have the amount abated, reduced, or eliminated in proportion to the percentage of negligence of said others, including parties and unnamed individuals and entities, proximately causing Plaintiff's injuries and damages, if any there were. AS AND FOR A FOURTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff failed to mitigate damages, if any, and accordingly, is not entitled to the relief sought in the Complaint. AS AND FOR A FIFTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff knew, or in the exercise of ordinary care should have known, of the risks and hazards involved in the undertaking in which said Plaintiff was engaged, but nevertheless, and with full knowledge of these things, did fully and voluntarily consent to assume the risks and hazards ISAIAH PEOPLES'NSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Z z Iz Oggmaw~ f & & o'' ~ ~ &z 0 ~0 & I- uj ~ t~ g ~ LLl UJ oa z O 10 12 13 16 17 20 21 22 23 25 26 involved in the undertaking. AS AND FOR A SIXTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, Plaintiff is barred from any recovery as to this answering Defendant, in that any damage was the direct and proximate result of an independent and superseding action ofother persons or parties and not due any an act or omission on the part of this Defendant. AS AND FOR A SEVENTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, that this answering Defendant alleges that the action is barred by the appropriate Statutes of Limitation, including but not limited to, the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1, and all other applicable statutes of limitations. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, this answering Defendant alleges that liability, if any, for non-economic damages is limited pursuant to California Civil Code section 1431,2. AS AND FOR A NINTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THF. COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, the Complaint fails to state facts sufficient to entitle Plaintiff to an award of punitive or exemplary damages against this answering Defendant pursuant to California Civil Code section 3294. AS AND FOR A TENTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action therein, that the imposition of any punitive or exemplary damages would deprive this Defendant of his property without due process of law under the California Constitution and the United States Constitution, pursuant to California Civil Code section 3294. AS AND FOR A ELEVENTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause of action alleged therein violates Defendant's Fifth Amendment Privilege against Self Incrimination, and Defendant's constitutional rights under California and Federal laws. Defendant does not intend to, nor does he by filing this Answer, waive his Fifth Amendment Privilege against Self Incrimination. ISAIAH PEOPLES'NSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT CC x O tt l- Z Q eu &&o + tn ~ tat 'n O Pn l Z ee z ta «a I «a O ln 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 Dated July /0, 2021 MCNAMARA, NEY, BEATTY, SLATTERY, BORGES & AMBACHER LLP Wilma J. Gray Attorneys for Defendant ISAIAH PEOPLES AS AND FOR A TWELFTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, and each and every cause ofaction therein, answering Defendant presently has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to whether they may have additional, as yet unstated, affirmative defenses. Answering Defendant reserves herein the right to assert additional affirmative defenses in the event discovery indicates that would be appropriate. WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays: 1. Plaintiff takes nothing by way of Complaint on file herein; 2. Defendant be hence dismissed with costs of suit incurred; and 3. For such other and fiuther relief as the court deems just and proper. 22 23 24 25 26 27 ISAIAH PEOPLES'NSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE VIA E-MAIL I hereby declare that I am a citizen of the United States, am over the age of eighteen years, 3 and not a party to the within action. My electronic notification address is: 4 karen.mason@mcnamaralaw.corn. On this date, I electronically served the foregoing ISAIAH PEOPLES'NSWER TO x U gg x D Ogg & g L- m ~0PnD „Z H t- @i~ F m hC d 12 13 14 15 Zhiming Wang, Esq. Pacific Coast Trial Law Firm, APC 7380 Clairemont Mesa Blvd., Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92111 Phone: 858-952-1901 Fax: 858-333-4401 E-Mail:info@pacificlawoffice.corn 16 17 I declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on July, 2021 at Pleasant Hill, 18 California. 19 6 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept 7 service by e-mail or electronic transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the persons at the 8 e-mail addresses listed below. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any 9 electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. Attorneys For Plaintiff Ping Liu: 20 Karen L. Mason 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ISAIAH PEOPLES'NSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT