Preview
FILED
3/12/2020 9:19 AM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLASCO., TEXAS
Gia Rodriguez DEPUTY
CAUSE NO. DC-20-02088
JACQUELINE MOBLEY IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff,
V.
14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
MARIA ORTIZ
Defendant.
DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
DEFENDANT, MARIA ORTIZ'S, ORIGINAL ANSWER
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES MARIA ORTIZ, Defendant in the above—styled and numbered cause, and
files Defendant's Original Answer, and in support hereof would respectfully show unto the Court
the following:
1.
GENERAL DENIAL
Defendant denies each and every, all and singular the material allegations made and
contained in the Original Petition and any petition Which P1aintiff(s) may hereinafter file by way
of amendment or supplement, and, in accordance With Texas law, demands that P1aintiff(s) prove
by a preponderance 0f the credible evidence each and every such allegation made and contained
therein.
2.
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE OF PLAINTIFF
Further answering, if the same be necessary, without waiver 0f the foregoing, Defendant
would show that at the same time and 0n the occasion in question, Plaintiff was guilty 0f one 0r
more negligent acts and/or omissions Which were the sole proximate cause or proximately
contributed t0 cause, the incident in question and any and all resulting injuries and damages.
Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 1
DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER
Our File Number: 0498693571.1
3.
FAILURE TO MITIGATE DAMAGES
Further answering, if the same be necessary, and without waiving any 0f the matters
hereinabove alleged, this Defendant would show that Plaintiff, through want 0f care, aggravated
or failed t0 mitigate the effect of his/her injuries resulting from the occurrence in question.
4.
PRIOR CONDITION FOR DAMAGES
Further answering, if the same be necessary, and without waiving any 0f the matters
hereinabove alleged, Defendant would show by way 0f affirmative defense that Plaintiff” s physical
damages complained of, if any, were the result ofprior 0r preexisting injuries, accidents 0r physical
conditions and said prior 0r pre-existing injuries, accidents 0r physical conditions were the sole
and/or a contributing cause 0f the Plaintiff’s damages alleged against this Defendant.
5.
SPECIFIC NEGLIGENCE OF PLAINTIFF
This Defendant would show that at the time and on the occasion in question, Plaintiff failed t0
exercise that degree of care and caution Which would have been exercised by a person of ordinary
prudence in one 0r more of the following particulars:
a) Plaintiff failed to make application of her brakes;
b) Plaintiff failed to make timely application of her brakes;
c) Plaintiff failed to swerve t0 avoid the accident;
d) Plaintiff was driving at an excessive rate of speed for the conditions and circumstances then
and there existing;
e) Plaintiff failed t0 keep a proper lookout;
f) Plaintiff failed t0 yield the right 0f way t0 the Defendant;
Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 2
DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER
Our File Number: 0498693571.1
Each and every act of negligence, as alleged above, was the sole and only proximate cause
0r alternatively, a direct and proximate cause of the accident 0r accidents, and the damages, if any,
and the injuries, if any, sustained by Plaintiff.
6.
SUBSEOUENT INJURIES UNRELATED TO ACCIDENT
Further answering, if the same be necessary, and without waiving any of the matters
hereinabove alleged, Defendant would show by way 0f affirmative defense that the Plaintiff’s
physical damages complained 0f, if any, were the result 0f subsequent injuries, accidents 0r
physical conditions and said subsequent injuries, accidents 0r physical conditions were the sole
and/or a contributing cause 0f the Plaintiff’s damages alleged against this Defendant.
7.
HEALTH CARE PAYMENTS
Pleading further, Defendant would assert that Plaintiff s recovery 0f medical 0r health care
expenses incurred is limited to the amount actually paid or recovery of medical 0r health care
expenses incurred is limited to the amount actually paid 0r incurred by or 0n behalf 0f the claimant
as mandated by Tex. CiV. Prac. Rem. Code 41 .0105.
8.
DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF’S INTENT TO USE DISCOVERY
AGAINST DEFENDANT PURSUANT TO TEX.R.CIV.P. 193.7
Paragraph IX of Plaintiff’s Original Petition indicates that Plaintiff seeks t0 use discovery
against Defendant pursuant to TeX.R.CiV.P. 193.7. The Notice simply indicates that Plaintiff
intends t0 use “any document(s) produced in written discovery” but fails t0 specify with any
particularity what documents Plaintiff intends t0 use.
Rule 193.7 automatically authenticates documents Where the Defendant has been given
“actual notice that the document will be used” and permits the Defendant t0 obj ect if an obj ection
Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 3
DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER
Our File Number: 0498693571.1
to the specific document is warranted. In the present case, Plaintiff has not specified what
document 0r documents they intend to use s0 it is impossible for the Defendant t0 obj ect.
9.
AMOUNT OF RECOVERY
In addition t0 any other limitation under law, recovery 0f medical or health care expenses
incurred is limited to the amount actually paid 0r incurred by 0r on behalf of the claimant.
10.
JURY REQUEST
Defendant respectfully requests a jury trial.
1 1.
DESIGNATED E-SERVICE EMAIL ADDRESS
The following is the undersigned attorney’s designation 0f electronic service email address
for all electronically served documents and notices, filed and unfiled, pursuant t0 TeX.R.CiV.P.
21(f)(2) & 21(a). (DallasLegal@allstate.com). This is the undersigned’s ONLY electronic service
email address, and service through any other email address Will be considered invalid.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant prays that Plaintiff(s) take
nothing by this suit against Defendant, that Defendant be discharged, and that the Court grant such
other and further relief, both general and special, at law and in equity to Which Defendant may be
justly entitled.
Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 4
DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER
Our File Number: 0498693571.1
Respectfully submitted,
SUSAN L. FLORENCE & ASSOCIATES
QLM.
JOHN COUCH
TBN: 24048407
1201 Elm Street, Suite 5050
Dallas, TX 75270
DallasLegal@allstate.com
(214) 659-4359
(877) 678-4763 (fax)
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
MARIA ORTIZ
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy 0f the foregoing has been served in compliance
With Rules 21 and 21a 0f the Texas Rules 0f Civil Procedure 0n the 12th day 0f March, 2020, t0:
Attorney for Plaintiff
Larry Rolle
State Bar No. 17212600
ROLLE LAW
2030 Main Street, Suite 200
Dallas, Texas 75201
Tel: (214) 742-8897
1arryr@rbr1.com
QLM.
JOHN COUCH
Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 5
DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER
Our File Number: 0498693571.1
Preview
FILED 3/12/2020 9:19 AM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DALLASCO., TEXAS Gia Rodriguez DEPUTY CAUSE NO. DC-20-02088 JACQUELINE MOBLEY IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, V. 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT MARIA ORTIZ Defendant. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT, MARIA ORTIZ'S, ORIGINAL ANSWER TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: NOW COMES MARIA ORTIZ, Defendant in the above—styled and numbered cause, and files Defendant's Original Answer, and in support hereof would respectfully show unto the Court the following: 1. GENERAL DENIAL Defendant denies each and every, all and singular the material allegations made and contained in the Original Petition and any petition Which P1aintiff(s) may hereinafter file by way of amendment or supplement, and, in accordance With Texas law, demands that P1aintiff(s) prove by a preponderance 0f the credible evidence each and every such allegation made and contained therein. 2. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE OF PLAINTIFF Further answering, if the same be necessary, without waiver 0f the foregoing, Defendant would show that at the same time and 0n the occasion in question, Plaintiff was guilty 0f one 0r more negligent acts and/or omissions Which were the sole proximate cause or proximately contributed t0 cause, the incident in question and any and all resulting injuries and damages. Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 1 DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER Our File Number: 0498693571.1 3. FAILURE TO MITIGATE DAMAGES Further answering, if the same be necessary, and without waiving any 0f the matters hereinabove alleged, this Defendant would show that Plaintiff, through want 0f care, aggravated or failed t0 mitigate the effect of his/her injuries resulting from the occurrence in question. 4. PRIOR CONDITION FOR DAMAGES Further answering, if the same be necessary, and without waiving any 0f the matters hereinabove alleged, Defendant would show by way 0f affirmative defense that Plaintiff” s physical damages complained of, if any, were the result ofprior 0r preexisting injuries, accidents 0r physical conditions and said prior 0r pre-existing injuries, accidents 0r physical conditions were the sole and/or a contributing cause 0f the Plaintiff’s damages alleged against this Defendant. 5. SPECIFIC NEGLIGENCE OF PLAINTIFF This Defendant would show that at the time and on the occasion in question, Plaintiff failed t0 exercise that degree of care and caution Which would have been exercised by a person of ordinary prudence in one 0r more of the following particulars: a) Plaintiff failed to make application of her brakes; b) Plaintiff failed to make timely application of her brakes; c) Plaintiff failed to swerve t0 avoid the accident; d) Plaintiff was driving at an excessive rate of speed for the conditions and circumstances then and there existing; e) Plaintiff failed t0 keep a proper lookout; f) Plaintiff failed t0 yield the right 0f way t0 the Defendant; Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 2 DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER Our File Number: 0498693571.1 Each and every act of negligence, as alleged above, was the sole and only proximate cause 0r alternatively, a direct and proximate cause of the accident 0r accidents, and the damages, if any, and the injuries, if any, sustained by Plaintiff. 6. SUBSEOUENT INJURIES UNRELATED TO ACCIDENT Further answering, if the same be necessary, and without waiving any of the matters hereinabove alleged, Defendant would show by way 0f affirmative defense that the Plaintiff’s physical damages complained 0f, if any, were the result 0f subsequent injuries, accidents 0r physical conditions and said subsequent injuries, accidents 0r physical conditions were the sole and/or a contributing cause 0f the Plaintiff’s damages alleged against this Defendant. 7. HEALTH CARE PAYMENTS Pleading further, Defendant would assert that Plaintiff s recovery 0f medical 0r health care expenses incurred is limited to the amount actually paid or recovery of medical 0r health care expenses incurred is limited to the amount actually paid 0r incurred by or 0n behalf 0f the claimant as mandated by Tex. CiV. Prac. Rem. Code 41 .0105. 8. DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF’S INTENT TO USE DISCOVERY AGAINST DEFENDANT PURSUANT TO TEX.R.CIV.P. 193.7 Paragraph IX of Plaintiff’s Original Petition indicates that Plaintiff seeks t0 use discovery against Defendant pursuant to TeX.R.CiV.P. 193.7. The Notice simply indicates that Plaintiff intends t0 use “any document(s) produced in written discovery” but fails t0 specify with any particularity what documents Plaintiff intends t0 use. Rule 193.7 automatically authenticates documents Where the Defendant has been given “actual notice that the document will be used” and permits the Defendant t0 obj ect if an obj ection Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 3 DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER Our File Number: 0498693571.1 to the specific document is warranted. In the present case, Plaintiff has not specified what document 0r documents they intend to use s0 it is impossible for the Defendant t0 obj ect. 9. AMOUNT OF RECOVERY In addition t0 any other limitation under law, recovery 0f medical or health care expenses incurred is limited to the amount actually paid 0r incurred by 0r on behalf of the claimant. 10. JURY REQUEST Defendant respectfully requests a jury trial. 1 1. DESIGNATED E-SERVICE EMAIL ADDRESS The following is the undersigned attorney’s designation 0f electronic service email address for all electronically served documents and notices, filed and unfiled, pursuant t0 TeX.R.CiV.P. 21(f)(2) & 21(a). (DallasLegal@allstate.com). This is the undersigned’s ONLY electronic service email address, and service through any other email address Will be considered invalid. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant prays that Plaintiff(s) take nothing by this suit against Defendant, that Defendant be discharged, and that the Court grant such other and further relief, both general and special, at law and in equity to Which Defendant may be justly entitled. Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 4 DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER Our File Number: 0498693571.1 Respectfully submitted, SUSAN L. FLORENCE & ASSOCIATES QLM. JOHN COUCH TBN: 24048407 1201 Elm Street, Suite 5050 Dallas, TX 75270 DallasLegal@allstate.com (214) 659-4359 (877) 678-4763 (fax) ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy 0f the foregoing has been served in compliance With Rules 21 and 21a 0f the Texas Rules 0f Civil Procedure 0n the 12th day 0f March, 2020, t0: Attorney for Plaintiff Larry Rolle State Bar No. 17212600 ROLLE LAW 2030 Main Street, Suite 200 Dallas, Texas 75201 Tel: (214) 742-8897 1arryr@rbr1.com QLM. JOHN COUCH Mobley vs. Ortiz PAGE 5 DEFENDANT MARIA ORTIZ'S ORIGINAL ANSWER Our File Number: 0498693571.1