arrow left
arrow right
  • DALLAS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT  vs.  CHEROKEE INSURANCE COMPANYCNTR CNSMR COM DEBT document preview
  • DALLAS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT  vs.  CHEROKEE INSURANCE COMPANYCNTR CNSMR COM DEBT document preview
  • DALLAS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT  vs.  CHEROKEE INSURANCE COMPANYCNTR CNSMR COM DEBT document preview
  • DALLAS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT  vs.  CHEROKEE INSURANCE COMPANYCNTR CNSMR COM DEBT document preview
						
                                

Preview

FILED DALLAS COUNTY 6/5/2019 1:35 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK Treva Parker-Ayodele CAUSE NO. DC-19-06151 DALLAS COUNTY HOSPITAL § IN THE DISTRICT COURT d/b/a PARKLAND HEALTH DISTRICT d/b/a § & 8: HOSPITAL SYSTEM, § § Plaintiff, Plaintifi; § § v. v. § unmtmcmmtmmtmwmmcm 193RD 193KB DISTRICT COURT § CHEROKEE INSURANCE COMPANY § and COMERICA BANK, § § Defendants. Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS BANK’S ORIGINAL ANSWER COMERICA BANK'S COMES NOW Comerica Comerica Bank, and files Bank, and its Original files its Answer, and Original Answer, and in in support support thereof thereof would respectfully respectfully show this this Court the the following: following: ANSWER 1. 1. Pursuant to Pursuant Rule 92 to Rule 92 of the the Texas Texas Rules Rules of 0f Civil Civil Procedure, Procedure, Comerica Bank generally denies each generally denies each and every, every, all all and singular, the allegations singular, the contained in allegations contained in Plaintiffs Plaintiff’s Original Original Petition Petition and and demands strict proof thereof. strict proof thereof. 2. 2. Comerica Bank asserts Comerica that Plaintiffs asserts that Plaintiff’s claims claims against against Comerica Bank are are barred barred by the by the three-year three-year statute statute of of limitations under Texas Business limitations under Business and Commerce Code § § 3. 3 l1 18(g). .1 8(g). 3. 3. Comerica Bank further further asserts that defense asserts that defense of of waiver. waiver. 4. 4. Comerica Bank further further asserts that defense assefis that defense of of estoppel. estoppel. 5. 5. Comerica Bank further further asserts asserts that Plaintiff has that Plaintiff has failed to mitigate failed to mitigate its its alleged alleged damages. damages. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Comerica prays that Comerica Bank prays that Plaintiff Plaintiff Dallas Dallas County County Hospital District d/b/a Hospital District d/b/a Parkland Health & Hospital Parkland Health Hospital System take nothing System take by way nothing by way of its of its BANK’S ORIGINAL ANSWER -— Page COMERICA BANK'S Page 1l 491611 49161] claims, and that Comerica Bank go hence without day, and have such other and further relief, both general and special, either in law or in equity to which it may be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, VINCENT SERAFINO GEARY By: M WADDELL JENEVEIN, P.C. Scott E. 74"? Hayes State Bar No. 09280050 shayes@vin1aw.com Victor C. Serafino State Bar No. 18032050 cserafino@vin1aw.com 1601 Elm Street, Suite 4100 Dallas, Texas 75201 T: (214) 979-7400 F: (214) 979-7402 ATTORNEYS FOR COMERICA BANK CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE A record 0n this true the F and correct copy of the foregoing has been forwarded day of June, 2019 by e-service to: t0 the following counsel of Douglas Turek The Turek Law Firm, PC 25227 Grogans Mill Road, Suite 100A The Woodlands, TX 77380 dturek@tureklawfirm.com P. Marcus White Whitehurst& Cawley, L.L.P. 16300 Addison Road, Suite 100 Addison, TX 75001 mwhite@whitehurstlaw.com MVQ Scott H'ayes COMERICA BANK’S ORIGINAL ANSWER — Page 2 491611