Answer Unlimited Fee Applies

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.March 29, 2021

SAMUELSON, WILSON & ROE 210 Non‘h Fourth Street, Suite 201 Son Jose, CA 951 12 \OmNOUI-hwwfi mVQUW-km-‘OCmVO‘UW-bkmwflo 21 CV381431 Santa Clara - Civil R. Burciaga 41799-50-25 (ZHAN/CHO, MICHELLE) 19-5821099 PATRICIA M. GREEN ROE (SBN 116405) E'ec"°"i°a"y Fi'ed pgr@swr_,ow.com by Superior Court of CA, SAMUELSON, WILSON a ROE County of Santa Clara. 210 Nor’rh Four’rh S’rree’r, Sui’re 201 on 7/28/2021 4:37 PM ?OII’I JESS, C1283; 1730 5320 Reviewed By: R. Burciaga eep one: - Facsimile: (408) 295-5799 gfijzlfilzolgslgflggg E-SERVICE: qu@swr-Iow.com 0nd mxl@swr-Iow.com ' A’r’rorneys for Defendon’r JIAN ZHANG IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA MICHELLE CHO, cm individual; NO. 21CV381431 Plainfiffls), DEFENDANT ZHANG’S ANSWER TO v. PLAINTIFF ZHO'S COMPLAINT JIAN ZHANG, cm individual; 0nd DOES 1 Through 50, inclusive, Defendon’r(s). Action Filed: 3/29/2027 Unlimited Jurisdiction Defendant, JIAN ZHANG in answer ’ro ’rhe unverified complaint by ploin’riff MICHELLE CHO, herein odmi’r, deny 0nd allege as follows: Under ’rhe provision of §431.30 of The Code of Civil Procedure of The S’ro’re of California, ’rhis answering defendant denies, generally 0nd specifically, all 0nd singular, each 0nd every allegation contained in ’rhe Unverified Complaint of ploin’riff herein, 0nd ’rhe whole Thereof, 0nd specifically denies ’rho’r ploin’riff hos been injured or damaged Gs alleged herein, or in any o’rher sum or manner, or otherwise o’r all. 1. AS A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ’ro ’rhe Complaint and each alleged Cause of Acfion Thereof, This answering defendant alleges Tho’r ploin’riff was 0T foul’r ond/or negligent in 0nd obou’r ’rhe mo’r’rers referred ’ro in -1- DEFENDANT ZHANG'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF ZHO’S COMPLAINT 4] 799-50-25 (ZHAN/CHO, MICHELLE) 19-5821099 SAMUELSON, WILSON & ROE 210 Nor’rh Fourth S’rree’r SUITe 201 Son Jose, CA 951 12 \OOOVOCn-poomfl MMMMMMMMfi-I-I-I-I-I-Iflflfi OO\IO\O‘I->OO-'O\OOOVO\U‘I#OOI\D-'O said Comploin’r, 0nd Tho’r said foul’r, carelessness 0nd negligence on plaintiff’s own por’r proximately contributed To The happening of The incident in ques’rion, cmd To The injuries, loss, 0nd damages complained of, if any There were. 2. AS A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ’ro ’rhe Complaint 0nd each alleged Cause of Ac’rion Thereof, This answering defendon’r alleges Tho’r The injuries 0nd damages complained of by plaintiff, if There were ony, were ei’rher wholly or in por’r directly 0nd legally caused by The negligence ond/or foul’r of person or en’ri’ries oTher Than This answering defendant 0nd said negligence 0nd/or foul’r comparatively reduces The proportion of negligence ond/or foul’r 0nd corresponding liabili’ry of This answering defendant. 3. AS A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ’ro The Comploin’r 0nd each alleged Cause of Ac’rion Thereof, ’rhis answering defendant alleges Tho’r said Comploin’r foils To s’ro’re foc’rs sufficien’r To cons’ri’ru’re c1 cause of oc’rion ogoins’r This answering defendonT or OT all. 4. AS A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ’ro ’rhe Complaint 0nd each alleged Cause of Ac’rion Thereof, This answering defendan’r alleges plaintiff foiled ’ro mi’rigo’re The damages, if any, alleged in The Comploin’r which plaintiff con’rends he/she suffered 0nd ore, Therefore, barred from any recovery, if any. 5. AS A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE To The Comploin’r 0nd each alleged Cause of Ac’rion Thereof, This answering defendon’r alleges Tho’r The liability of defendant for plaintiff’s alleged non-economic damages, if any, should be limi’red pursuant ’ro ’rhe Fair Responsibility Ac’r of 1986, Sec’rion 1430, eT seq, of The California Civil Code, in direc’r proportion To defendant’s percen’roge of negligence, if any, 0nd o seporcl’re judgmen’r shall be rendered ogoins’r defendant for Tho’r omoun’r. -2- DEFENDANT ZHANG’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF ZHO’S COMPLAINT 41799-50-25 (ZHAN/CHO, MICHELLE) 19-5821099 SAMUELSON, WILSON & ROE 210 Nor’rh Fourth S’rree’r SUITe 201 Son Jose, CA 951 12 \OOOVOCn-poomfl MMMMMMMMfi-I-I-I-I-I-Iflflfi OO\IO\O‘I->OO-'O\OOOVO\U‘I#OOI\D-'O 6. AS A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ’ro The Comploinf 0nd each alleged Cause of Ac’rion Thereof, This answering defendant alleges Tho’r The Comploin’r and each cause of oc’rion alleged Therein is barred by California Code of Civil Procedure §335.1 ond/or The applicable s’ra’ru’re of limi’rofions, including, bu’r no’r limi’red To C.C.P. §§337, 337.1, 337.15, 338, 339, 340.3 0nd 343. 7. AS A SEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ’ro The Complaint 0nd each alleged Cause of Ac’rion Thereof, This answering defendonf is informed 0nd believes, 0nd based on such informo’rion 0nd belief, alleges Tho’r payments were mode ’ro or behalf of plaintiff by or on behalf of This defendon’r in on omoun’r according ’ro proof. Defendon’r claims a credi’r or se’r-off ogoins’r any verdict or judgemen’r entered ogoins’r him/her in The omoun’r of such payments. 8. AS AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ’ro The Comploin’r 0nd each alleged Cause of Ac’rion Thereof, This answering defendon’r ore informed 0nd believe Tho’r 0T oll Times mentioned herein ploin’riff was in ’rhe course 0nd scope of his/her employment 0nd ’rho’r plaintiff’s exclusive remedy lie wi’rhin The workers compensation lows; or, in The al’rerno’rive, The injuries sustained by plaintiff, if any, were caused or con’rribu’red ’ro by The carelessness, negligence or o’rher foul’r of plaintiff’s employer ond/or said employer’s agents, servants, or employees 0nd Tho’r from ony oword mode ’ro ploin’riff This defendant is en’ri’rled To 0 credi’r, se’r-off or reduction in damages in 0n omoun’r in direc’r proportion ’ro said employer’s ond/or said employer’s ogen’rs’, servon’rs’ or employees’ percentage of foul’r pursuant ’ro ’rhe rule Wi’r’r v. Jackson. 9. AS A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE To ’rhe Complaint 0nd each alleged Cause of Ac’rion Thereof, This answering defendon’r is informed 0nd believes 0nd Thereon alleges Tho’r plaintiff’s righ’r To recovery is limi’red -3- DEFENDANT ZHANG’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF ZHO’S COMPLAINT 41799-50-25 (ZHAN/CHO, MICHELLE) 19-5821099 SAMUELSON, WILSON & ROE 210 Non‘h Fourth Street, Suite 201 Son Jose, CA 951 12 \OmNOUI-hwwfi mVQUW-km-‘OCmVO‘UW-bkmwflo pursuant ’ro Civil Code §3333.4(o)(2) because plaintiff is ’rhe owner of The involved vehicle which was no’r insured os required by ’rhe financial responsibility lows of California os of The do’re of ’rhe alleged accident. 10. AS A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ’ro ’rhe Complaint 0nd eoch alleged Cause of oc’rion Thereof, ’rhis answering defendant ore informed 0nd believe 0nd Thereon alleges Tho’r plaintiff’s righ’r ’ro recovery is limi’red pursuant ’ro Civil Code §3333.4(o)(3) because ploin’riff is ’rhe uninsured operator of ’rhe vehicle involved in ’rhe alleged accident and conno’r establish financial responsibiliw as required by The financial responsibility lows of ’rhis s’ro’re. WHEREFORE, ’rhis answering defendant prays Tho’r plaintiff Toke nothing by reason of his/her Complaint, Tho’r This answering defendant hove judgment for Their cos’r of sui’r incurred herein, 0nd for such o’rher 0nd fur’rher relief Gs ’rhe Cour’r may deem proper. Do’red: 7/28/2021 SAMUELON, WILSON & ROE Pfimewk PATRICIA M. GREEN ROE A’r’romey for Defendant JIAN ZHANG -4- DEFENDANT ZHANG'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF ZHO’S COMPLAINT 4] 799-50-25 (ZHAN/CHO, MICHELLE) 19-5821099 SAMUELSON, WILSON & ROE 210 NorTh Fourth STreeT, SUiTe 201 Son Jose, CA 951 12 \OmNOUI-hwwfi mVQUW-km-‘OCmVO‘UW-bkmwflo PROOF OF SERVICE BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Cho v. Zhong Son’ro Clara 21CV381431 I, The undersigned, declare ’rho’r | om o resident of ’rhe Uni’red S’ro’res; employed in ’rhe Ci’ry 0nd Coun’ry of Son Jose, S’ro’re of California; over ’rhe age of 18 years; no’r o por’ry ’ro ’rhe wi’rhin en’ri’rled cause; and my business address is 21 O Nor’rh Four’rh S’rree’r, Sui’re 201 , Son Jose, CA 951 12. On 7/28/2021, | served ’rhe wi’rhin document(s), DEFENDANT ZHANG’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF ZHO’S COMPLAINT on The interested por’ries in This oc’rion Gs follows: Andrew T. Holing, Esq. The Hossell Low Group, APC 4079 19th Avenue Son Francisco, CA 941 32 T: 41 5-334-41 1 1 F: 41 5-469-9885 E: ondrew@hoddelllowqroupcom Attorney for Plaintiff MICHELLE CHO [X] [By ELECTRONIC MAIL] | caused ’rhe document(s) referenced above ’ro be sen’r ’ro ’rhe person(s) o’r The email address(es) Iis’red above. | did no’r receive, wi’rhin o reasonable ’rime of’rer ’rhe service, any electronic message or o’rher indication Tho’r The service was unsuccessful. This is necessi’ro’red during The declared no’rionol emergency due ’ro The Coronovirus (COVID-l 9) pandemic because s’roff in This office is working remotely, 0nd is unable ’ro send physical mail as usual. Therefore, ’rhe documenfis) referenced above is/ore served only by using elec’rronic mail. We will provide o physical copy, Upon wri’r’ren request only. | declare under penol’ry of perjury under The lows of ’rhe Sfo’re of California Tho’r ’rhe above is True 0nd correct, 0nd Tho’r This declaration was execuTed on 7/28/2021, o’r Son Jose, California.mg Marcello Modril -5- DEFENDANT ZHANG'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF ZHO’S COMPLAINT 4] 799-50-25 (ZHAN/CHO, MICHELLE) 19-5821099