Answer Cross Complaint

Cal. Super. - 3rd Dist.June 9, 2021

John P. Sciacca, SBN 265049 POWERS MILLER 2 3500 Douglas Boulevard, Suite 100 Roseville, California 95661 3 Telephone No. (916) 924-7900 Telecopier No. (916) 924-7980 4 Attorneys for Defendant, DUANE JOSEPH GORHAM SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF PLACER 1O PAMELA RAE MAUPIN, Plaintiff(s), 12 vs. 13 14 15 16 17 Defendants. DUANE JOSEPH GORHAM, DANA WAYNE JOHNSON, NIKUNJ A. PATEL, P.V. HOLDING CORP., dha AVIS BUDGET GROUP, THOMAS RICHARD DOROW, ERIC RICHARD WICK, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, ) Case No. S-CV-0046822 ) ) ) ) ) ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF ) ERIC RICHARD WICK ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1B 21 COMES NOW cross-defendant DUANE JOSEPH GORHAM and answers cross-complainant ERIC RICHARD WICK's cross-complaint on file herein as follows: Cross-defendant denies, generally and specifically, each and all allegations contained in cross-complainant's cross- complaint on file herein, and in each and every cause of action 24 therein contained, and further denies that cross-complainant was damaged in any sum or sums at all as alleged in said cross- complaint or otherwise. 27 AS AND FOR A FIRST, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the cross-complaint herein, this answering cross- 1 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT defendant alleges that cross-complainant's cross-complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering cross-defendant. 4 AS AND FOR A SECOND, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE 3 DEFENSE to the cross-complaint herein, this answering cross- 4 defendant alleges that cross-complainant was careless and negligent in and about the matters described in said cross- s complaint and said negligence and carelessness on the part of cross-complainant proximately caused the injuries and damages Io complained of, if any there were. AS AND FOR A THIRD, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the cross-complaint herein, this answering cross- 13 defendant alleges that the injuries and/or damages allegedly 14 sustained, if any there be, were caused solely by the Is negligence and/or willful and intentional misconduct and/or other legal fault of persons or entities other than this answering cross-defendant, and that if this answering cross- is defendant is in any way legally responsible, any damages to Is which cross-complainant would otherwise be entitled should be 2o reduced in proportion to the amount of legal fault attributable to other persons or entities which caused cross-complainant's 22 alleged injuries, if any there be. 23 AS AND FOR A FOURTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE 24 DEFENSE to the cross-complaint herein, this answering cross- 25 defendant alleges that at all times and places mentioned in the 26 cross-complaint, cross-complainant failed to mitigate the 27 amount of his damages, if any. The damages caused to cross- 28 complainant could have been mitigated by due diligence on his 2 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT part or by one acting under similar circumstances. Cross- complainant' failure to mitigate is a bar to his recovery under the cross-complaint. 4 AS AND FOR A FIFTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE 5 DEFENSE to the cross-complaint herein, this answering cross- 5 defendant alleges that cross-complainant's cross-complaint, and 7 each cause of action therein alleged, is barred by the 5 applicable statute of limitations, including but not limited to CCP 5 335.1. io AS AND FOR A SIXTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the cross-complaint herein, this answering cross- defendant alleges that cross-complainant's recovery, if any, must be limited to economic damages pursuant to Civil Code i4 3333.4. 15 AS AND FOR A SEVENTH, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the cross-complaint herein, this answering cross- 17 defendant alleges that the accident referred to, and all is injuries and damages resulting therefrom, if any, were the is result of an unavoidable accident, and occurred without any 2o negligence on the part of this answering cross-defendant. 21 WHEREFORE, this answering cross-defendant prays that 22 cross-complainant take nothing from this answering cross- 23 defendant by way of his cross-complaint, that this answering 24 cross-defendant be henceforth dismissed with his costs of suit, 25 and for such other and further relief as the court deems just /// /// 2S /// 3 ANSWER TO CROSS-CONPLATNT and proper. DATED: December 13, 2021 POWERS MILLER By: J A fendant DUANE JOSEPH GORHAM 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT Maupin v. Gorham Placer County Superior Court No. S-CV-0046822 PROOF OF SERVICE I am a citizen of the United States, employed in the County of Placer, State of California. My business address is 3500 Douglas Boulevard, Suite 100, Roseville, California 99661. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the above-entitled action. On December 14, 2021, I caused the within ANSWER TO CROSS- COMPLAINT OF ERIC RICHARD WICK, the original of which was produced on recycled paper, to be served as follows: 10 12 MAIL - I am readily familiar with Powers Miller's practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Services. Pursuant to said practice, each document is placed in an envelope, the envelope is sealed, the appropriate postage is placed thereon and the sealed envelope is placed in the office mail receptacle. Each day's mail is collected and deposited in a U.S. mailbox at Roseville, California at or before the close of each day' business. (CCP Section 1013a(3) .) 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 FACSIMILE - December 14, 2021 at a.m./p.m., by use of facsimile machine telephone number (916) 924-7980, I served a true copy of the aforementioned document(s) on the parties in said action by transmitting by facsimile machine to the numbers as set forth below. The facsimile machine I used complied with California Rules of Court, Rule 2003(3) and no error was reported by the machine. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 2008(e), I caused the machine to print a transmission records of the transmission, a copy of which is attached to this Declaration. PERSONAL SERVICE - Delivered by hand to the addressee addressed as set forth below. 20 21 OVERNIGHT COURIER - By causing a true copy and/or original thereof to be personally delivered via the following overnight courier service. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 XX EMAIL - December 14, 2021, pursuant to the agreement of the parties, by use of email, I served a true copy of the aforementioned document(s) on the parties in said action to the email addresses as listed below. *SEE SERVICE LIST BELOW* I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on December 14, 2021, at Roseville, Califo nia. v~ Qu&~ HEATHER MATTHEWS Maupin v. Gorham Placer County Superior Court No. S-CV-0046822 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF Evan A. Wolfe 12120 Herdal Drive Auburn, CA 95603 wolfesharkltpatt.net COUNSEL FOR RICHARD WICK Leslie A. Romeo Bretoi Lutz & Stele PO Box 10790 Santa Ana CA 92711 sacramentolecrotpmercurvinsurance.corn 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 COUNSEL FOR DANA JOHNSON Lauren E. Britt Carbone Smith & Koyama 1610 Arden Way, Suite 190 Sacramento CA 95815 lauren.brittticsaa.corn cathv.murohvicsaa.corn kimberlv.dvkstraicsaa.corn COUNSEL FOR THOMAS DOROW Doug Van Breemen Tiza Serrano Thompson & Associates 980 9th Street, Suite 2250 Sacramento CA 95814 doua.vanbreementpstatefarm.corn 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 POWERS MILLER A Professional Corporation