On October 05, 2018 a
Answer
was filed
involving a dispute between
Hill, Lisa,
and
Quaid Harley-Davidson, Inc. A California Corporation,
for Business Tort/Unfair Business Practice Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
Gregory i Sabo Esq Bar No 169760
Jill L Johnson Bar No 198981 C
CHAPMAN GLUCKSMAN DEAN ROEB BARGER SUPERIOR COUR7 OF CAUFORNIA
2 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION C UNTY OiT 5AN BERNARDINO
SAN BERNA DINc7 DlSTRICT
11900 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD SUITE 800
3 LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90064 0704
MAY 14 2pt9
3io ao aa Fax 3io ao 6sso
4
Attorneys for Defendant QUAID HARLEY BY
5 DAVIDSON INC SARBRINA JA ON DEPUTY
6
7
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
9
10
LISA HILL an individual on behalf of Case No CIVDS 1826573
11 herself the all others
proposed class es
similarly situated and on behalf of the Complaint Filed October 5 2018
2 general public
Assigned for All Purposes to
13 Plaintiff Hon Wilfred Schneider
Dept S32
14
v
QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON INC S
15 ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S FIRST
QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON 1NC a AMENDED COMPLAINT
16 California Corporation and DOES 1 through
10 inclusive
Defendant
9 TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD
2 HEREIN
21 Defendant QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON INC Answering Defendant hereby
22 answers pleads and otherwise responds to the claims in the unverified operative Complaint
23 Complaint of Plaintiff LISA HILL an individual Plaintiff as follows
24 I
25 GENERAL DENIAL AND ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S COMPLAINT
26 l Pursuant to California Code ofCivil Procedure C C P 431 30 d Defendant
27 denies generally and specifically each every and all of the allegations set forth in the Complaint
2 and in each of the purported causes of action set forth therein
3797 846 1
QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON iNC S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
1 2 Defendant further denies generally and specifically that Plaintiff has sustained or
2 will sustain any damage or is entitled to recover any damages in the sum alleged or in any other
3 sum or sums or at all or is entitled to any form of relief whether legal or equitable whatsoever
4 from or against the Defendant by reason of any act or omission on the part of Defendant or by any
5 of its agents or employees
6 II
7 DEFENDANT S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
8 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
9 Failure to State a Cause of Action
10 3 As a separate distinct and first affirmative defense Defendant states and alleges
11 that the Complaint and each of the purported causes of action set forth therein individually and
12 collectively fail to state facts sufficient to constitute any legally cognizable cause of action against
13 the answering Defendant
14 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 Statute of Limitations
16 4 As a separate distinct and second affirmative defense Defendant states and alleges
17 that the Complaint and each of the purported causes of action set forth therein individually and
18 collectively are barred by the applicable statute of limitations including but not limited to C C P
19 337 338 339 340 et seq Labor Code 203 et seq and Business and Professions Code 17200
20 et seq
21 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
22 Laches
23 5 As a separate distinct and third affirmative defense Defendant states and alleges
24 that the Complaint and each of the purported causes of action therein are barred by the doctrine
25 of laches in that Plaintiff unjustifiably delayed in commencing and or prosecuting this action to
26 the detriment of Defendant
27
28
3797 846 2
QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON INC S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Document Filed Date
May 14, 2019
Case Filing Date
October 05, 2018
Category
Business Tort/Unfair Business Practice Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
Gregory i Sabo Esq Bar No 169760 Jill L Johnson Bar No 198981 C CHAPMAN GLUCKSMAN DEAN ROEB BARGER SUPERIOR COUR7 OF CAUFORNIA 2 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION C UNTY OiT 5AN BERNARDINO SAN BERNA DINc7 DlSTRICT 11900 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD SUITE 800 3 LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90064 0704 MAY 14 2pt9 3io ao aa Fax 3io ao 6sso 4 Attorneys for Defendant QUAID HARLEY BY 5 DAVIDSON INC SARBRINA JA ON DEPUTY 6 7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 9 10 LISA HILL an individual on behalf of Case No CIVDS 1826573 11 herself the all others proposed class es similarly situated and on behalf of the Complaint Filed October 5 2018 2 general public Assigned for All Purposes to 13 Plaintiff Hon Wilfred Schneider Dept S32 14 v QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON INC S 15 ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S FIRST QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON 1NC a AMENDED COMPLAINT 16 California Corporation and DOES 1 through 10 inclusive Defendant 9 TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD 2 HEREIN 21 Defendant QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON INC Answering Defendant hereby 22 answers pleads and otherwise responds to the claims in the unverified operative Complaint 23 Complaint of Plaintiff LISA HILL an individual Plaintiff as follows 24 I 25 GENERAL DENIAL AND ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S COMPLAINT 26 l Pursuant to California Code ofCivil Procedure C C P 431 30 d Defendant 27 denies generally and specifically each every and all of the allegations set forth in the Complaint 2 and in each of the purported causes of action set forth therein 3797 846 1 QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON iNC S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 2 Defendant further denies generally and specifically that Plaintiff has sustained or 2 will sustain any damage or is entitled to recover any damages in the sum alleged or in any other 3 sum or sums or at all or is entitled to any form of relief whether legal or equitable whatsoever 4 from or against the Defendant by reason of any act or omission on the part of Defendant or by any 5 of its agents or employees 6 II 7 DEFENDANT S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 8 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 Failure to State a Cause of Action 10 3 As a separate distinct and first affirmative defense Defendant states and alleges 11 that the Complaint and each of the purported causes of action set forth therein individually and 12 collectively fail to state facts sufficient to constitute any legally cognizable cause of action against 13 the answering Defendant 14 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 Statute of Limitations 16 4 As a separate distinct and second affirmative defense Defendant states and alleges 17 that the Complaint and each of the purported causes of action set forth therein individually and 18 collectively are barred by the applicable statute of limitations including but not limited to C C P 19 337 338 339 340 et seq Labor Code 203 et seq and Business and Professions Code 17200 20 et seq 21 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 Laches 23 5 As a separate distinct and third affirmative defense Defendant states and alleges 24 that the Complaint and each of the purported causes of action therein are barred by the doctrine 25 of laches in that Plaintiff unjustifiably delayed in commencing and or prosecuting this action to 26 the detriment of Defendant 27 28 3797 846 2 QUAID HARLEY DAVIDSON INC S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT