Answer: IDA CHRISTINA FUA CRUZ VS. JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                MOI

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Jun-25-2014 3:22 pm

| Case Number: CGC-11-515542
Filing Date: Jun-25-2014 3:20
Filed by: KEITH TOM
Juke Box: 001 Image: 04531153
ANSWER

IDA CHRISTINA FUA CRUZ VS. JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ et al

001004531153

Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Cnr nd DA WH BBW NY =

YN NY NY YN NY NY KY SB Be Be ewe ew ew Be eB
eo QU A aA FB OBO YN = SF BD we AA HDR WN = CS

ROBERT S. AARON (SBN 138903) F I L LS

TIMOTHY C. WILSON (SBN 173928) San Franminn Penn eA, he
AARON & WILSON, LLP er Cour
150 Post Street, Suite 400 JUN 25 2014

San Francisco, California 94108

Telephone: (415) 438-7800 CLERK)OF THE COUR;
Facsimile: (415) 438-7808 BY: q A

Email: rsaaron@aaron-wilson.com a

Email: tewilson@aaron-wilson.com

Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Defendants

TAXI EQUIPMENT LEASING LLC, YELLOW CAB
COOPERATIVE, INC., TAXI PROPERTY COMPANY,
INC., WOLLEY, LLC, JAMES GILLESPIE, HAL
MELLEGARD, NICK OLSEN, PAMELA MARTINEZ,
RICHARD WIENER, STEVEN REIMERS

SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

IDA CRISTINA CRUZ FUA, Case No. CGC 11 515542

ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF
JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ

Plaintiff,
v.

JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ, an
Individual, et al.,

Defendants.
Complaint Filed: October 31, 2014
X-Complaint Filed: May 13, 2014

Trial Date: September 22, 2014

JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ,
Cross-Complainant,

v.

TAXI EQUIPMENT LEASING LLC, SAN
FRANCISCO INDEPENDENT TAXI
ASSOCIATION, YELLOW CAB
COOPERATIVE, INC., TAXI PROPERTY
COMPANY, INC., WOLLEY, LLC,
JAMES GILLESPIE, DMITRI ERENKOV,
HAL MELLEGARD, NICK OLSEN,
PAMELA MARTINEZ, RICHARD
WIENER, STEVEN REIMERS and ROES
1-50,

eee OSes

Cross-Defendants,

1

emer Cr Conga

Answer to Cross-Complaint of JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZCOME NOW Cross-Defendants TAXI PROPERTY COMPANY, INC., WOLLEY, LLC,
JAMES GILLESPIE, HAL MELLEGARD, NICK OLSEN, PAMELA MARTINEZ, RICHARD
WIENER, and STEVEN REIMERS, and in answer to the Cross-Complaint of Cross-
Complainant JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ (the “Cross-Complaint”) on file herein and

on behalf of them alone, admit, deny and allege as follows:

Under the provisions of Section 431.30(d) of California Code of Civil Procedure, these
answering cross-defendants deny each and every and all of the allegations contained in the Cross-
Complaint and further deny that cross-complainant has sustained damages in any sum whatsoever,
or at all, by reason of any act or omission on the part of these answering cross-defendants.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

These answering cross-defendants, and each of them, pursuant to section 430.30 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, as and for separate and distinct defenses to the Cross-Complaint on file
herein and, unless otherwise stated, to each cause of action contained therein, assert these various
affirmative defenses, pursuant to which these answering cross-defendants request that the action be
barred in its entirety or the recovery sought herein reduced, limited or otherwise affected as follows:

Affirmative Defense Number 1 (Fails to State Cause of Action)

The Cross-Complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
Affirmative Defense Number 2 (Statute of Limitations)

The action is barred by the applicable statute of limitations set forth in, but not limited to,
California Code of Civil Procedure sections 335.1, 338, 340, 343 or any other applicable Statute of|
Limitations.

Affirmative Defense Number 3 (Comparative Fault)

Cross-complainant was comparatively at fault in the manner and style as set forth in the
case of Li v. Yellow Cab Co., (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804.

Affirmative Defense Number 4 (Plaintiffs Active Negligence)

Cross-complainant was actively negligent in and about the matters alleged.

Affirmative Defense Number 5 (Not Substantial Factor/Superseding Cause)

No act or omission of these answering cross-defendants was a substantial factor in bringing
2
Answer to Cross-Complaint of JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ

foes iC Cm doeCm IN DH BF WN

PN YN NN NN NY Be He we ew we oe ee Be
on DAU BF Hw NH = SBC wMH AAA RSH BS

about the damages alleged by the cross-complainant; nor was any act or omission a contributing
cause thereof. Any alleged act or omission of these answering cross-defendants was superseded by
the acts or omissions of others, including plaintiff, cross-complainant and/or other individuals or
entities not named in the Cross-Complaint and First Amended Complaint for Damages herein,
which were the independent, intervening, and proximate cause of the damage or loss allegedly
sustained by cross-complainant.

Affirmative Defense Number 6 (Co-Defendant Liability)

Co-cross-defendants, and each of them, named and unnamed in the Cross-Complaint and
the charging allegations contained therein, were guilty of negligence or other acts or omissions in
the matters set forth in said pleading that proximately caused or contributed to the damages of loss
complained of and that the Court is requested to determine and allocate the percentage of
negligence attributable to each of the co-cross-defendants.

Affirmative Defense Number 7 (Responsibility of Others)

The damages sustained by cross-complaintant were either wholly, or in part, caused by
persons, firms, corporations or entities other than these answering cross-defendants and said
conduct comparatively reduces the percentage of negligence, if any, of these answering cross-
defendants.

Affirmative Defense Number 8 (Assumption of Risk)

Each and every party seeking to recover against these answering cross-defendants assumed
the risk of the injury, damage or harm complained of, thereby reducing or barring all recovery
sought in this action accordingly.

Affirmative Defense Number 9 (Failure to Mitigate)

The damages sought in this action were aggravated by the failure of the party seeking to
recovery them to use reasonable diligence to mitigate them.

Affirmative Defense Number 10 (Several Liability for Non-Economic Damages)

The damages sought in this action, if any there are, and the recovery of those damages
against these answering cross-defendants are limited by Civil Code sections 1430 et seq.,

including section 1431.2.
3

decor Coe erie

Answer to Cross-Complaint of JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZNy

Affirmative Defense Number 11 (Latches)
This action is barred by the Doctrine of Laches.
Affirmative Defense Number 12 (Waiver)
Cross-complainant has waived his right to maintain the action filed in this case.
Affirmative Defense Number 13 (Estoppel)
Cross-complainant is estopped by action of law or by conduct from maintaining the action
filed in this case.

Affirmative Defense Number 14 (Consent)

Cross-complainant consented to the conduct alleged in the Cross-Complaint (which

conduct is denied and merely stated for the purpose of this defense).
Affirmative Defense Number 15 (Unclean Hands)

Cross-complainant is guilty of unclean hands.

Affirmative Defense Number 16 (Spoliation of Evidence)

Cross-complainant, either intentionally or negligently, failed to preserve the primary
evidence relevant to this litigation, thus failing to give these answering cross-defendants an
opportunity to examine, inspect and test the evidence thereby severely damaging and prejudicing
these answering cross-defendants’ ability to present their defense.

Affirmative Defense Number 17 (Reserve Right to Additional Defenses)

These answering cross-defendants presently have insufficient knowledge or information
on which to form a belief as to whether they may have additional, as yet unstated affirmative
defenses available. These answering cross-defendants reserve herein the right to assert
additional defenses in the event that the discovery or evidence adduced at trial indicates that they
would be appropriate.

Mt
Mf
Ml
Ml

Annwer to Croat Copan. doe 4

Answer to Cross-Complaint of JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZWHEREFORE, these answering cross-defendants pray for judgment as follows:

1, That cross-complainant takes nothing by way of the complaint on file herein;

2. That any damages sustained by cross-complainant be reduced by the percentage of
cross-complainant’s own negligence;

3. For cost of suit incurred herein, including attorney’s fees;

4. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

Dated: June 25, 2014

AXI PROPERTY COMPANY, INC.,
WOLLEY, LLC, JAMES GILLESPIE,
HAL MELLEGARD, NICK OLSEN,
PAMELA MARTINEZ, RICHARD
WIENER, STEVEN REIMERS

5

ror Crem Comin ee

Answer to Cross-Complaint of JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZFua v. Sanchez

San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 11 515542 Consolidated with
San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 12 519794 and
San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 13 529705

Our File No. 0845

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

I, Cristina Mitchell, declare:

lam a citizen of the United States, over 18 years of age and not a party to the within
action. I am self-employed in the City and County of San Francisco; my business address is 150
Post Street, Suite 400, San Francisco, California, 94108.

On June 25, 2014, I served the attached and/or enclosed:
ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ

on all parties in this action, at the following address(es):

Todd P. Emanuel, Esq.
Mark D. Rosenberg, Esq.
Emanuel Law Group
702 Marshall Street, Suite 400
Redwood City, CA 94063
Fax: (650) 369-8999
Tel: (650) 369-8900
Email: Todd@TEinjurylaw.com
Email: Mark@TEinjurylaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiff, Ida Cristina Cruz Fua

D. Douglas Shureen, Esq.
McMillan & Shureen LLP
50 Santa Rosa Avenue, Suite 200
Santa Rosa, CA 95404
Fax: (707) 576-7955
Tel: (707) 525-5400
Email: doug.shureen@memillanshureen.com
Counsel for Defendant, Joel Enrique Andino
Sanchez

Taimur Qazi, Esq.
Consumers Law Group
4700 Teller Avenue, 3rd Floor
Newport Beach, CA
Fax: (949) 261-7680
Tel: (949) 261-9847
Email: tqazi@consumerslawgroup.com
Counsel for Plaintiffs, SanaaEseifan &
Yasmine Eseifan

Michael S. Morse, Esq.
Glenn E. Gutsche, Esq.
Morse & Associates
1027 Brown Avenue
Lafayette, CA 94549
Fax: (925) 671-0104
Tel: (925) 671-2200
Email: mike@calsubrolaw.com
Email: glenn@calsubrolaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiff, Allstate Insurance Co.

Gregory H. McCormick, Esq.
Burnham Brown
1901 Harrison Street, 14th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Fax: (510) 444-6800
Tel: (510) 835-6666
Email: tdowney@burnhambrown.com
Counsel for Defendant, Alan DaSilva & SF
Independant Taxi Assn.

Colin C. Munro, Esq.
Carlson, Calladine & Peterson LLP
353 Sacramento Street, 16th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Fax: (415) 391-388
Tel: (415) 391-3911
Email: cmunro@ccplaw.com
Co-Counsel for Defendants, Taxi Equipment
Leasing LLC, Yellow Cab Cooperative, Inc.

Proof of ServiceFua y. Sanchez

San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 11 515542 Consolidated with
San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 12 519794 and

San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 13 529705

Our File No, 0845

Service was accomplished by causing either an original or a true copy of the above-
referenced document(s) to be distributed as follows:

& BY MAIL: I caused such document(s) to be placed in a sealed envelope, addressed as
indicated above, with prepaid first-class postage thereon, and then placed the envelope(s) for
collection and mailing, in accordance with the firm’s ordinary business practice. I am readily
familiar with the firm's ordinary business practice for collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Under that practice
correspondence for mailing is deposited with United States Postal Service on the date indicated
for service, with prepaid first-class postage thereon.

Cj BY EMAIL: I caused such documents to be transmitted via email to the parties indicated
above, at their respective email addresses.

BY HAND DELIVERY: I caused such documents to be hand delivered to the addresses
dicated above.

BT

VIA FACSIMILE: I caused such documents to be transmitted via facsimile to the parties
indicated above, at their respective facsimile numbers.

O VIA EXPRESS CARRIER: I caused such documents to be collected by an agent for the
United States Postal Service, United Parcel Service, Federal Express or other overnight carrier,
to be delivered by way of overnight mail to the addresses indicated above.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the
foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on June 25, 2014, at San Francisco, California.

CULL

“Cristina Mitchell

rain 2

Proof of Service