On March 03, 2022 a
Answer
was filed
involving a dispute between
Reynoso, Jasmin,
and
Does 2 To 25,
Maragno, Billy Joe,
Maragno, William,
for Auto PI/PD/WD Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
O O
ORlGINAL
Victoria Gunther, Esq. [SBN: 143907]
HOMAN, STONE 8: ROSSI ATTORNEYS
1461 Ford Street, Suite 201
Redlands, CA 92373 .
*j h r"?
2;?
I4.)
, A
.
..
MET" A
(909)307—9380
(909) 793—0210 - Fax W
coma,
F
w mwfééé’fikgfifigm
?‘é'aresém‘ msrmcr
(J1
Attorneys for Defendant. BILLY JOE MARAGNO WW 3 35
2323
B‘f‘
,1 _ ?ifli‘sfiiiax‘ I
Mam E DMER {SEPfir.)
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDTNO
JASMIN REYNOSO, Case N0.: CIVSB2204842
Unlimited Civil Jurisdicl ion
Plaintiff?
DEFEENDANT, BILLY JOE MARAGNO’S
vs. ANSWER T0 COMPLAINT
BILLY JOE MARAGNO, and DOES 1 through 25, [Assigned t0 Honorable Michael A. Sachs; Dept.
inclusive, 828] 03"”:1
Defendants. TSC: 04/21/2023
A8
COMES NOW, Defendant, BILLY JOE MARAGNO (“Defendant”), and hereby responds t0
XV:|
the Complaint 0f Plaintiff JASMTN REYNOSO (“Plaintiff”), for himself alone and for no other person
0r entity, as follows:
1. Pursuant t0 Section 431‘30(d) 0f the California Code 0f Civil Procedure, ‘this answering
Defendant denies, generally and specifically, each and every allegation in Plaintist Complaint and each
and every cause ofaction set forth therein. This answering Defendant further generally and specifically
denies that Plaintiff has been damaged in the amounts alleged 0r in any other sunL 0r at ail, by reason 0f
any act 0r omission 0n the pan OfIhis answering Defendant, 0r 0n the part ofany 0f his agents, servants
and/or employees
-l-
DFFEENDANTS, BILLY JOE MARAGNO’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
Document Filed Date
March 28, 2023
Case Filing Date
March 03, 2022
Category
Auto PI/PD/WD Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
O O ORlGINAL Victoria Gunther, Esq. [SBN: 143907] HOMAN, STONE 8: ROSSI ATTORNEYS 1461 Ford Street, Suite 201 Redlands, CA 92373 . *j h r"? 2;? I4.) , A . .. MET" A (909)307—9380 (909) 793—0210 - Fax W coma, F w mwfééé’fikgfifigm ?‘é'aresém‘ msrmcr (J1 Attorneys for Defendant. BILLY JOE MARAGNO WW 3 35 2323 B‘f‘ ,1 _ ?ifli‘sfiiiax‘ I Mam E DMER {SEPfir.) SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDTNO JASMIN REYNOSO, Case N0.: CIVSB2204842 Unlimited Civil Jurisdicl ion Plaintiff? DEFEENDANT, BILLY JOE MARAGNO’S vs. ANSWER T0 COMPLAINT BILLY JOE MARAGNO, and DOES 1 through 25, [Assigned t0 Honorable Michael A. Sachs; Dept. inclusive, 828] 03"”:1 Defendants. TSC: 04/21/2023 A8 COMES NOW, Defendant, BILLY JOE MARAGNO (“Defendant”), and hereby responds t0 XV:| the Complaint 0f Plaintiff JASMTN REYNOSO (“Plaintiff”), for himself alone and for no other person 0r entity, as follows: 1. Pursuant t0 Section 431‘30(d) 0f the California Code 0f Civil Procedure, ‘this answering Defendant denies, generally and specifically, each and every allegation in Plaintist Complaint and each and every cause ofaction set forth therein. This answering Defendant further generally and specifically denies that Plaintiff has been damaged in the amounts alleged 0r in any other sunL 0r at ail, by reason 0f any act 0r omission 0n the pan OfIhis answering Defendant, 0r 0n the part ofany 0f his agents, servants and/or employees -l- DFFEENDANTS, BILLY JOE MARAGNO’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT