Preview
1 Alison M. Crane, SBN 197359
Rima Haggar, SBN 344167
2 BLEDSOE, DIESTEL, TREPPA & CRANE LLP
180 Sansome Street, 5th Floor
3 San Francisco, California 94104-3713
Telephone: (415) 981-5411
4 Facsimile: (415) 981-0352
acrane@bledsoelaw.com
5 rhaggar@bledsoelaw.com
6 Attorney for Defendant DOE 2, an individual
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
10
11 JANE BWN DOE, an individual, Case No. 22CV006012
12 Plaintiffs, ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO
PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED
13 v. COMPLAINT
14 DOE 1, a California local public entity;
DOE 2, an individual; and DOES 3 to
15 100, inclusive,
16 Defendants.
17
18 Defendant DOE 2 (erroneously sued as MATTHEW BISSEL) (hereinafter “Defendant”)
19 responds to Plaintiff JANE BWN DOE’s (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) First Amended Complaint
20 (hereinafter “Complaint”) for damages on file herein and deny and allege as follows:
21 Defendant generally and specifically denies each and every, all and singular, of the
22 allegations against Defendant contained in the Complaint, and in each cause of action thereof, and
23 in this connection, Defendant further denies that Plaintiff has been injured or damaged in any
24 sum, or at all, by reason of any act or omission on the part of this answering Defendant or of his
25 agents or employees, if any.
26 1. AS A FIRST, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint
27 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that the Complaint
28 fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering Defendant or of
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 his agents or employees, or at all.
2 2. AS A SECOND, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
3 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges Plaintiff’s
4 Complaint is vague, ambiguous, and uncertain.
5 3. AS A THIRD, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint
6 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff’s claims
7 are barred by the applicable statute of limitations including, but not limited to, those set forth in
8 Code of Civil Procedure sections 335, 335.1, 337, 338, 339, 340, 340.1, and 343.
9 4. AS A FOURTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
10 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that
11 Plaintiff is barred from relief by the doctrine of estoppel.
12 5. AS A FIFTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint
13 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff is barred
14 from relief by the doctrine of laches.
15 6. AS A SIXTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint
16 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff is barred
17 from relief by the doctrine of waiver.
18 7. AS A SEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
19 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that as a
20 result of the acts, conduct, and/or omissions of others, this answering Defendant is released from
21 liability as to each Cause of Action presented in the Complaint.
22 8. AS AN EIGHTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
23 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant, and his agents or
24 employees, if any, alleges they exercised due care and diligence in all of the matters alleged in the
25 Complaint, and no act or omission by this answering Defendant, or of his agents or employees, if
26 any, was the proximate cause of any damage, injury or loss to Plaintiff.
27 9. AS A NINTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint
28 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff’s
-2-
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 injuries, if any, were proximately caused by an unforeseeable independent, intervening and/or
2 superseding event beyond the control, and unrelated to any actions or conduct, of this answering
3 Defendant. The actions and conduct of this answering Defendant, if any, was superseded by the
4 negligence and wrongful conduct of others.
5 10. AS A TENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
6 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that to the
7 extent Plaintiff suffered damages alleged in her Complaint, such damages were not actually and
8 or proximately caused by this answering Defendant, or his agents or employees, if any, but by the
9 acts or omissions of persons other than this answering Defendant.
10 11. AS AN ELEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
11 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that any
12 alleged loss, injury, or damages incurred by Plaintiff, if any, were proximately caused by the
13 negligent or willful acts or omissions of parties or others whom this answering Defendant neither
14 controlled nor had the right to control and were not proximately or legally caused by any acts,
15 omissions, or other conduct of Defendant.
16 12. AS A TWELFTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
17 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that
18 Plaintiff’s causes of action are barred on the grounds that the conduct of this answering
19 Defendant, or of his agents or employees, if any, referred to in the Complaint, if any, was not a
20 substantial factor in bringing about the injuries and damages complained of by Plaintiff.
21 13. AS A THIRTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
22 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that the
23 injuries and damages complained of by Plaintiff, if any there were, were either wholly or in part
24 directly and proximately caused by the negligence or other wrongful acts or omissions of persons
25 or entities other than this answering Defendant and said negligence comparatively reduces the
26 proportion of negligence and corresponding liability of this answering Defendant.
27 14. AS A FOURTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
28 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant contends that if
-3-
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 liability is assessed against him, pursuant to California Civil Code sections 1430 et seq., this
2 answering Defendant shall be liable only for the amount of non-economic damages allocated to it
3 in direct proportion to the percentage of fault assessed against this answering Defendant by the
4 trier of fact, and request that a separate judgment be rendered against this answering Defendant
5 for that amount, but in setting forth this affirmative defenses, this answering Defendant makes no
6 admission that it, or his agents or employees, if any, are liable to Plaintiff in any amount or in any
7 proportion, and makes no admission that Plaintiff has been damaged in any sum or sums, or at all.
8 15. AS A FIFTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
9 complaint, this answering Defendant alleges that should Plaintiff recover from this answering
10 Defendant, Defendant is entitled to indemnification, either in whole or in part, from all persons or
11 entities whose negligence or fault proximately contributed to Plaintiff’s damages, if any there
12 were.
13 16. AS A SIXTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
14 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that
15 Plaintiff’s prayer for damages against this answering Defendant pursuant to Civil Code of
16 Procedure section 340.1 is barred as such an award would impermissibly require ex post facto
17 application of law.
18 17. AS A SEVENTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
19 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that
20 Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this
21 answering Defendant for Sexual Harassment pursuant to Civil Code section 51.9, which does not
22 apply to allegations of childhood sexual abuse and/or conduct which predates that law.
23 18. AS AN EIGHTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
24 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that
25 Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this
26 answering Defendant for Sexual Harassment pursuant to Civil Code section 52.4, which does not
27 apply to allegations of childhood sexual abuse and/or conduct which predates that law.
28 ///
-4-
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 19. AS A NINETEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the
2 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges it
3 presently has insufficient knowledge or information on which to form a belief as to whether they
4 may have additional, as yet unstated, defenses available. This answering Defendant reserves the
5 right to assert additional affirmative defenses in the event discovery indicates that additional
6 affirmative defenses are appropriate.
7 WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays that Plaintiff takes nothing by the
8 Complaint and that this answering Defendant has a judgment for its costs of suit incurred herein,
9 including reasonable attorneys’ fees, and for such other and further relief as the Court deems
10 proper.
11 Dated: August 5, 2022 BLEDSOE, DIESTEL, TREPPA & CRANE LLP
12
By:
13 Alison M. Crane
14 Rimma Haggar
Attorney for Defendant DOE 2, an individual
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-5-
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 Jane BWN DOE v. DOE 1, et al.
Alameda Superior Court Case No. 22CV006012
2 BIS03-16265
3 PROOF OF SERVICE
4
I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am over the age of eighteen years and not a
5 party to the within action. My business address is 180 Sansome Street, 5th Floor, San
Francisco, California 94104-3713. On the date indicated below, I caused to be served the
6 following document(s):
7 ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT
8
upon the interested parties in said action by the means specified below:
9
10 Morgan A. Stewart, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff
Saul E. Wolf, Esq. Tel: (949) 252-9990
11 Cristina J. Nolan, Esq. Fax: (949) 252-9991
Manly Stewart Finaldi mstewart@manlystewart.com
12
19100 Von Kannan Avenue, Suite 800 swolf@manlystewart.com
13 Irvine, California 92612 cnolan@manlystewart.com
bmendoza@manlystewart.com
14
Ross R. Nott, Esq. Attorneys for Doe 1
15 SPINELLI DONALD & NOTT APC Tel.: (916) 448-7888
601 University Avenue, Suite 225 Fax: (916) 448-6888
16 Sacramento, CA 95825 rossn@sdnlaw.com
17
18 XXX BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION by causing the documents to
be sent to the persons at the e-mail addresses set forth above. I did not receive, within
19 a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication
that the transmission was unsuccessful.
20
21 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 August 5, 2022, at
22 Concord, California.
23 ______________________
Merrilln Ruiz
24
25
26
27
28
PROOF OF SERVICE
Preview
1 Alison M. Crane, SBN 197359 Rima Haggar, SBN 344167 2 BLEDSOE, DIESTEL, TREPPA & CRANE LLP 180 Sansome Street, 5th Floor 3 San Francisco, California 94104-3713 Telephone: (415) 981-5411 4 Facsimile: (415) 981-0352 acrane@bledsoelaw.com 5 rhaggar@bledsoelaw.com 6 Attorney for Defendant DOE 2, an individual 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 10 11 JANE BWN DOE, an individual, Case No. 22CV006012 12 Plaintiffs, ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED 13 v. COMPLAINT 14 DOE 1, a California local public entity; DOE 2, an individual; and DOES 3 to 15 100, inclusive, 16 Defendants. 17 18 Defendant DOE 2 (erroneously sued as MATTHEW BISSEL) (hereinafter “Defendant”) 19 responds to Plaintiff JANE BWN DOE’s (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) First Amended Complaint 20 (hereinafter “Complaint”) for damages on file herein and deny and allege as follows: 21 Defendant generally and specifically denies each and every, all and singular, of the 22 allegations against Defendant contained in the Complaint, and in each cause of action thereof, and 23 in this connection, Defendant further denies that Plaintiff has been injured or damaged in any 24 sum, or at all, by reason of any act or omission on the part of this answering Defendant or of his 25 agents or employees, if any. 26 1. AS A FIRST, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint 27 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that the Complaint 28 fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering Defendant or of ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 his agents or employees, or at all. 2 2. AS A SECOND, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 3 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges Plaintiff’s 4 Complaint is vague, ambiguous, and uncertain. 5 3. AS A THIRD, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint 6 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff’s claims 7 are barred by the applicable statute of limitations including, but not limited to, those set forth in 8 Code of Civil Procedure sections 335, 335.1, 337, 338, 339, 340, 340.1, and 343. 9 4. AS A FOURTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 10 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that 11 Plaintiff is barred from relief by the doctrine of estoppel. 12 5. AS A FIFTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint 13 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff is barred 14 from relief by the doctrine of laches. 15 6. AS A SIXTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint 16 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff is barred 17 from relief by the doctrine of waiver. 18 7. AS A SEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 19 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that as a 20 result of the acts, conduct, and/or omissions of others, this answering Defendant is released from 21 liability as to each Cause of Action presented in the Complaint. 22 8. AS AN EIGHTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 23 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant, and his agents or 24 employees, if any, alleges they exercised due care and diligence in all of the matters alleged in the 25 Complaint, and no act or omission by this answering Defendant, or of his agents or employees, if 26 any, was the proximate cause of any damage, injury or loss to Plaintiff. 27 9. AS A NINTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint 28 and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff’s -2- ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 injuries, if any, were proximately caused by an unforeseeable independent, intervening and/or 2 superseding event beyond the control, and unrelated to any actions or conduct, of this answering 3 Defendant. The actions and conduct of this answering Defendant, if any, was superseded by the 4 negligence and wrongful conduct of others. 5 10. AS A TENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 6 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that to the 7 extent Plaintiff suffered damages alleged in her Complaint, such damages were not actually and 8 or proximately caused by this answering Defendant, or his agents or employees, if any, but by the 9 acts or omissions of persons other than this answering Defendant. 10 11. AS AN ELEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 11 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that any 12 alleged loss, injury, or damages incurred by Plaintiff, if any, were proximately caused by the 13 negligent or willful acts or omissions of parties or others whom this answering Defendant neither 14 controlled nor had the right to control and were not proximately or legally caused by any acts, 15 omissions, or other conduct of Defendant. 16 12. AS A TWELFTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 17 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that 18 Plaintiff’s causes of action are barred on the grounds that the conduct of this answering 19 Defendant, or of his agents or employees, if any, referred to in the Complaint, if any, was not a 20 substantial factor in bringing about the injuries and damages complained of by Plaintiff. 21 13. AS A THIRTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 22 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that the 23 injuries and damages complained of by Plaintiff, if any there were, were either wholly or in part 24 directly and proximately caused by the negligence or other wrongful acts or omissions of persons 25 or entities other than this answering Defendant and said negligence comparatively reduces the 26 proportion of negligence and corresponding liability of this answering Defendant. 27 14. AS A FOURTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 28 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant contends that if -3- ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 liability is assessed against him, pursuant to California Civil Code sections 1430 et seq., this 2 answering Defendant shall be liable only for the amount of non-economic damages allocated to it 3 in direct proportion to the percentage of fault assessed against this answering Defendant by the 4 trier of fact, and request that a separate judgment be rendered against this answering Defendant 5 for that amount, but in setting forth this affirmative defenses, this answering Defendant makes no 6 admission that it, or his agents or employees, if any, are liable to Plaintiff in any amount or in any 7 proportion, and makes no admission that Plaintiff has been damaged in any sum or sums, or at all. 8 15. AS A FIFTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 9 complaint, this answering Defendant alleges that should Plaintiff recover from this answering 10 Defendant, Defendant is entitled to indemnification, either in whole or in part, from all persons or 11 entities whose negligence or fault proximately contributed to Plaintiff’s damages, if any there 12 were. 13 16. AS A SIXTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 14 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that 15 Plaintiff’s prayer for damages against this answering Defendant pursuant to Civil Code of 16 Procedure section 340.1 is barred as such an award would impermissibly require ex post facto 17 application of law. 18 17. AS A SEVENTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 19 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that 20 Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this 21 answering Defendant for Sexual Harassment pursuant to Civil Code section 51.9, which does not 22 apply to allegations of childhood sexual abuse and/or conduct which predates that law. 23 18. AS AN EIGHTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 24 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges that 25 Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this 26 answering Defendant for Sexual Harassment pursuant to Civil Code section 52.4, which does not 27 apply to allegations of childhood sexual abuse and/or conduct which predates that law. 28 /// -4- ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 19. AS A NINETEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the 2 Complaint and each Cause of Action alleged therein, this answering Defendant alleges it 3 presently has insufficient knowledge or information on which to form a belief as to whether they 4 may have additional, as yet unstated, defenses available. This answering Defendant reserves the 5 right to assert additional affirmative defenses in the event discovery indicates that additional 6 affirmative defenses are appropriate. 7 WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays that Plaintiff takes nothing by the 8 Complaint and that this answering Defendant has a judgment for its costs of suit incurred herein, 9 including reasonable attorneys’ fees, and for such other and further relief as the Court deems 10 proper. 11 Dated: August 5, 2022 BLEDSOE, DIESTEL, TREPPA & CRANE LLP 12 By: 13 Alison M. Crane 14 Rimma Haggar Attorney for Defendant DOE 2, an individual 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -5- ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 Jane BWN DOE v. DOE 1, et al. Alameda Superior Court Case No. 22CV006012 2 BIS03-16265 3 PROOF OF SERVICE 4 I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am over the age of eighteen years and not a 5 party to the within action. My business address is 180 Sansome Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, California 94104-3713. On the date indicated below, I caused to be served the 6 following document(s): 7 ANSWER OF DEFENDANT DOE 2 TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 8 upon the interested parties in said action by the means specified below: 9 10 Morgan A. Stewart, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff Saul E. Wolf, Esq. Tel: (949) 252-9990 11 Cristina J. Nolan, Esq. Fax: (949) 252-9991 Manly Stewart Finaldi mstewart@manlystewart.com 12 19100 Von Kannan Avenue, Suite 800 swolf@manlystewart.com 13 Irvine, California 92612 cnolan@manlystewart.com bmendoza@manlystewart.com 14 Ross R. Nott, Esq. Attorneys for Doe 1 15 SPINELLI DONALD & NOTT APC Tel.: (916) 448-7888 601 University Avenue, Suite 225 Fax: (916) 448-6888 16 Sacramento, CA 95825 rossn@sdnlaw.com 17 18 XXX BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION by causing the documents to be sent to the persons at the e-mail addresses set forth above. I did not receive, within 19 a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. 20 21 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 August 5, 2022, at 22 Concord, California. 23 ______________________ Merrilln Ruiz 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE