Preview
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596
0G529 - Pl
File 23-25675 —JJB/JNR:
jar
Attomey for Defendants
IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT
FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO
TRACY SMITH, Case No.: 23 CV 003596
Plaintiff, JUDGE: SHERYL K. MUNSON
Vv.
DEFENDANTS, MEGAN
CLEANTURN INTERNATIONAL, OSBORNE AND CLEANTURN
LLC, et al. INTERNATIONAL, LLC’S
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S
Defendants. COMPLAINT WITH
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Comes now Defendants, Megan Osborne ‘and Cleanturn International, LLC (hereinafter
“Defendants”), by and through their undersigned counsel, and for their Answers to Plaintiff Tracy
Smith’s Complaint, states as follows:
1 Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
2 Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
3 Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
SECOND CLAIM
6 In response to Paragraph 6 of the Complaint, Defendants incorporate by reference
to their responses in Paragraphs 1 through 5 to the Complaint set forth above as if fully rewritten
herein.
7 Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
8 Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of Plaintiff's Complaint.
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596
0G529 - P2
THIRD CLAIM
9 In response to Paragraph 9 of the Complaint, Defendants incorporate by reference
to their responses in Paragraphs | through 8 to the Complaint set forth above as if fully rewritten
herein.
10. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Complaint to the
extent that Defendant is a business entity organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Ohio but denies the remaining allegations.
11. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 11 of Plaintiff’s Complaint
for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
12. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff’s Complaint to the
extent that Defendant is a business entity organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Ohio but denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 12 of Plaintiff’s Complaint for
want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
13. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint
for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
14. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Complaint
for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
15. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of Plaintiff's Complaint
for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1 The Complaint, in whole or in part, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted.
2 Plaintiff failed to join all necessary parties to this action.
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596
0G529 - P3
3 The UIM policy of Plaintiff is or may be primary over Defendant’s policy.
4 The claims asserted in the Complaint are barred, in whole or in part, by the
negligence, actions, and inactions of Plaintiff.
5 The damages which Plaintiff complains of were caused, in whole or in part, by
individuals or entities other than this Defendant and over whom this Defendant had no control or
right of control.
6 Plaintiff failed to minimize or mitigate her damages in this action.
7 The claims asserted are barred, in whole or in part, by lack of notice, lack of access,
and lack of possession and control of Defendant.
8 The claims asserted against Defendant may be barred, in whole or in part, by the
doctrine of payment and release.
9 The claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by the defenses set forth in Ohio
Civil Rules 8, 9, and 12, incorporated as if fully rewritten herein.
10. Ongoing discovery may reveal that other parties and non-parties were negligent and
that such negligence caused and/or caused the injuries and damages referenced in the Complaint,
by reason of which the claims against Defendant might be barred or reduced based upon the
apportionment of liability set forth in R.C. 2307.22 thru 2307.24.
11. Defendant states that Plaintiffs alleged damages, if any, were caused in whole or
in part by the comparative negligence, assumption of risk, and/or default upon the part of Plaintiff,
and any recovery by Plaintiff must be reduced accordingly pursuant to the applicable provisions
of the Ohio Revised Code.
12. Defendant states that the damage sustained herein was a direct and proximate result
of an intervening and/or superseding cause, thus, relieving Defendant of any and all liability.
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596
0G529 - PA
13. This Complaint is time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations and/or the
doctrine of laches.
14. Plaintiff’s claims fall under the Ohio Workers’ Compensation Statutes and recovery
in this venue is therefore barred.
15. Defendant reserves the right to raise additional defenses should such defenses
become known as discovery in this matter progresses.
16. Defendant hereby enters a general denial of each, and every allegation contained in
the Complaint which has not been specifically admitted.
WHEREFORE, Defendants demand that the Complaint be dismissed in its entirety, and
Plaintiff Tracy Smith be ordered to pay and/or reimburse all expenses incurred as a result of
Defendants being required to defend in this action.
/s/James J. Birch, Esq.
James J. Birch, Esq. (0092767)
James N. Rost, Esq. (0099535)
Rolfes Henry Co., LPA
18 W. 9" Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
T: (513) 579-0080
F: (513) 579-0222
jbirch @rolfeshenry.com
jrost@rolfeshenry.com
Attorneys for Defendants
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596
0G529 - P5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Thereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing Defendants’ Answer to the
Complaint, and Affirmative Defenses was served this 1“ day of September 2023, via electronic
mail, upon the following:
Sean H. Heffernan, Esq. (0095594)
3873 Broadway
Grove City, OH 43123
Phone: (614) 326-9597
Sean @McCartyHeffernan.com
Counsel for Plaintiff
/s/ James J. Birch
James J. Birch, Esq.
Preview
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596 0G529 - Pl File 23-25675 —JJB/JNR: jar Attomey for Defendants IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO TRACY SMITH, Case No.: 23 CV 003596 Plaintiff, JUDGE: SHERYL K. MUNSON Vv. DEFENDANTS, MEGAN CLEANTURN INTERNATIONAL, OSBORNE AND CLEANTURN LLC, et al. INTERNATIONAL, LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S Defendants. COMPLAINT WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Comes now Defendants, Megan Osborne ‘and Cleanturn International, LLC (hereinafter “Defendants”), by and through their undersigned counsel, and for their Answers to Plaintiff Tracy Smith’s Complaint, states as follows: 1 Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 2 Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 3 Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Complaint. SECOND CLAIM 6 In response to Paragraph 6 of the Complaint, Defendants incorporate by reference to their responses in Paragraphs 1 through 5 to the Complaint set forth above as if fully rewritten herein. 7 Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 8 Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596 0G529 - P2 THIRD CLAIM 9 In response to Paragraph 9 of the Complaint, Defendants incorporate by reference to their responses in Paragraphs | through 8 to the Complaint set forth above as if fully rewritten herein. 10. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Complaint to the extent that Defendant is a business entity organized and existing under the laws of the State of Ohio but denies the remaining allegations. 11. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 11 of Plaintiff’s Complaint for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations. 12. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff’s Complaint to the extent that Defendant is a business entity organized and existing under the laws of the State of Ohio but denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 12 of Plaintiff’s Complaint for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations. 13. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Complaint for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations. 14. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Complaint for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations. 15. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of Plaintiff's Complaint for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1 The Complaint, in whole or in part, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 2 Plaintiff failed to join all necessary parties to this action. Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596 0G529 - P3 3 The UIM policy of Plaintiff is or may be primary over Defendant’s policy. 4 The claims asserted in the Complaint are barred, in whole or in part, by the negligence, actions, and inactions of Plaintiff. 5 The damages which Plaintiff complains of were caused, in whole or in part, by individuals or entities other than this Defendant and over whom this Defendant had no control or right of control. 6 Plaintiff failed to minimize or mitigate her damages in this action. 7 The claims asserted are barred, in whole or in part, by lack of notice, lack of access, and lack of possession and control of Defendant. 8 The claims asserted against Defendant may be barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of payment and release. 9 The claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by the defenses set forth in Ohio Civil Rules 8, 9, and 12, incorporated as if fully rewritten herein. 10. Ongoing discovery may reveal that other parties and non-parties were negligent and that such negligence caused and/or caused the injuries and damages referenced in the Complaint, by reason of which the claims against Defendant might be barred or reduced based upon the apportionment of liability set forth in R.C. 2307.22 thru 2307.24. 11. Defendant states that Plaintiffs alleged damages, if any, were caused in whole or in part by the comparative negligence, assumption of risk, and/or default upon the part of Plaintiff, and any recovery by Plaintiff must be reduced accordingly pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Ohio Revised Code. 12. Defendant states that the damage sustained herein was a direct and proximate result of an intervening and/or superseding cause, thus, relieving Defendant of any and all liability. Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596 0G529 - PA 13. This Complaint is time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations and/or the doctrine of laches. 14. Plaintiff’s claims fall under the Ohio Workers’ Compensation Statutes and recovery in this venue is therefore barred. 15. Defendant reserves the right to raise additional defenses should such defenses become known as discovery in this matter progresses. 16. Defendant hereby enters a general denial of each, and every allegation contained in the Complaint which has not been specifically admitted. WHEREFORE, Defendants demand that the Complaint be dismissed in its entirety, and Plaintiff Tracy Smith be ordered to pay and/or reimburse all expenses incurred as a result of Defendants being required to defend in this action. /s/James J. Birch, Esq. James J. Birch, Esq. (0092767) James N. Rost, Esq. (0099535) Rolfes Henry Co., LPA 18 W. 9" Street Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 T: (513) 579-0080 F: (513) 579-0222 jbirch @rolfeshenry.com jrost@rolfeshenry.com Attorneys for Defendants Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2023 Sep 01 11:31 AM-23CV003596 0G529 - P5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing Defendants’ Answer to the Complaint, and Affirmative Defenses was served this 1“ day of September 2023, via electronic mail, upon the following: Sean H. Heffernan, Esq. (0095594) 3873 Broadway Grove City, OH 43123 Phone: (614) 326-9597 Sean @McCartyHeffernan.com Counsel for Plaintiff /s/ James J. Birch James J. Birch, Esq.