Preview
FILED
1 CIT ESERVE DC_24_05295 “13/533332!
DISTRICT CLERK
CAUSE NO. DALLAS 00., TEXAS
Cynthia R wmis DEPUTY
JEFFREY HAVARD § IN TI-IE DISTRICT COURT OF
Phintifi, §
§
v. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
§ 298th
MARIA TERESA RIVERA ROJ AS §
Defendant. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION & NOTICE OF REQUIRED DISCLOSURES
NOW COMES JEFFREY HAVARD (“Plaintiff”), and files this his Original Petition &
Notice of Required Disclosures and in support thereof would respectfully show the Court as follows:
I.
DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN AND RULE 47 STATEMENT
1.01 Pursuant to Rule 190.1 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff intends that
discovery be conducted under Discovery Control Plan Level Three.
1.02 Although Plaintiff believes that the ultimate decision regarding the amount of his
damages falls within the purview of the jury, Rule 47 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure requires
Plaintiff to Choose a specific claim for relief based on four categories under Rule 47. Due to this
pleading requirement, Plaintiff pleads that he seeks “monetary relief over $250,000.00 but less than
$1,000,000.00” Plaintiff reserves the right to amend his claim for monetary relief, if necessary,
when discovery is substantially complete.
II.
PARTIES
2.01 Plaintiff JEFFREY HAVARD is an individual who resides in Wilmer, Dallas
County, Texas. The last three digits of his TXDL are 803. The last three digits of his SNN are 618.
2.02 Defendant MARIA TERESA RIVERA ROJAS (hereinafter“Defendant ROJAS”)
is an individual who resides in Dallas, Dallas County, Texas. She may be served with process at
3208 Darvany Drive, Dallas, Texas 75220.
III.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3.01 Plaintiff brings this negligence action to recover for personal injuries and other
damages sustained as the result 0f a motor vehicle collision which occurred in Dallas County, Texas.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over all parties because all are Texas residents. This court has
subject matter jurisdiction over all claims asserted in this action because they are recognized
MVARD 7 PEAINTWF S ORIGINAL PETITION & NOTICE OF MUIRE) ESCLOSURES PAGEI
common law causes of action existing under Texas law, and Plaintiff seeks damages that are within
the jurisdictional limits of this court. Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas pursuant to Section
15.002(a)(1)&(2) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, because it is the county in which
all or a substantial paIt of the events giving rise to the claim occurred and is the county of
defendant’s residence at the time the cause of action accrued.
IV.
FACTUAL SUMMARY
4.01 This matter arises from a five vehicle collision on or about May 10, 2022. The
collision occurred on the northbound lanes of Inwood Road in Dallas, Texas. At the time of the
collision, Plaintiff was the restrained operator of a 2011 Ford F150 stopped at the stoplight at the
intersection of Inwood Road and I35E Stemmons Freeway. Defendant Rojas was also headed
northbound, behind Plaintiff, operating a 2007 Chevy Silverado. Defendant Rojas failed to control
her speed and collided into the rear end of Plaintiff’s vehicle. The impact was forceful enough to
push Plaintiff’s F150 into the vehicle in front of Plaintiff, starting a chain reaction and damaging five
vehicles. Plaintiff suffered severe and permanent injuries. The wreck, injuries, and other damages
suffered by Plaintiff were the direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant as more
specifically described herein below.
V.
CAUSES OF ACTION
Negligence - Defendant Roias:
5.01 At the time and on the occasion in question, Defendant Rojas, was negligent in the
operation of her vehicle in the following specific respects, among others:
a. Driver inattention;
b. Failing to apply her brakes;
c. Failing to control her speed;
d. Failing to take evasive action;
e. Failing to timely apply her brakes;
f. Failing to maintain a proper lookout;
g. Failing to take timely evasive action;
h. Operating a motor vehicle without a license;
Failing to maintain an assured safe stopping distance;
j. Operating her vehicle at an unsafe speed for the conditions of traffic; and,
k. Failing to reasonably and adequately follow safety instructions, regulations and laws.
5..02 Such negligence of Defendant Rojas proximately caused the incident in question, and
the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiff as a result thereof.
VARD AINTWF S RIGINAL TION OTICE OF UIRED SCIDSURES PAGE:
Negligence Per Se:
5.03 Furthermore, the negligent actions of Defendant Rojas as set forth above constituted
Violations of certain Texas state statutes governing the operation of motor vehicles on Texas
roadways. Specifically, and without limitation, Defendant Rojas was negligent per se by Violating:
(1) TEX. TRANS. CODE ANN .§545.062 by failing to keep an assured clear and safe distance between
vehicles; and (2) TEX. TRANS. CODE ANN.§545.351 by driving a vehicle at a speed greater than is
reasonable and prudent. At the time of the collision in question, Plaintiff was among the class of
persons specifically intended to be afforded the protection of these statutes governing the operation
of motor vehicles, and the collision, bodily injuries and other damages that resulted from each such
violation of statute or ordinance was the very type of harm that each such statute or ordinance was
intended to prevent. Accordingly, the doctrine of negligence per se is specifically applicable and
attributable to the conduct of Defendant Rojas as described above.
VI.
DAMAGES
6.01 As a result of Defendant’s negligence, Plaintiff Jeffery Havard has suffered injuries
and other damages including:
a. Physical pain sustained in the past;
b. Physical pain that, in reasonable probability, he will suffer in the future;
c. Mental anguish sustained in the past;
d. Mental anguish that, in reasonable probability, he will suffer in the future;
e. Physical impairment sustained in the past;
f. Physical impairment that, in reasonable probability, he will sustain in the future;
g. Medical care expenses incurred in the past;
h. Medical care expenses that, in reasonable probability, he will incur in the future;
Loss of earning capacity sustained in the past; and
j. Loss of earning capacity that, in reasonable probability, he will incur in the future;
6..02 Each of these damages was proximately caused by the negligence of Defendant and
has damaged Plaintiff in a sum which is within the jurisdictional limits of this court. For such items
of injury and damages, Plaintiff here and now sues.
6.03 Plaintiff also seeks recovery of his expenses and costs of suit, and pre—judgment and
post-judgment interest at the highest rate permitted by law.
VII.
JURY DEMAND
7.01 Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues presented in this action pursuant
to Rule 216 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
VARD AmeF S RIGHVAL TION OTICE OF UIRED SCIDSURES PAGE3
VIII.
NOTICE OF REQUIRED INITIAL DISCLOSURES
8.01 Pursuant to Rule 194 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant must make
initial disclosures, within thiIty (30) days after filing of the first answer or general appearance.
IX.
NOTICE
9.01 Pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 193.7, any and all documents produced
by Defendant in response to Plaintiff’ s written discovery are intended to be used by Plaintiff and
shall be deemed as properly authenticated for use against Defendant in any pretrial proceeding or
trial in this case.
X.
PRAYER
10.01 WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffprays thatDefendant be cited
to appear and answer herein, and that upon final trial of this cause, Plaintiff have and recover
judgment against said Defendant for damages as set forth above, and for such other and further relief
to which Plaintiff may show himself to be justly entitled.
Re ectfully sub 'tted,
JESSE A. C'ALDERON
State Bar No. 24096649
icalderon @ ibsiniurylaw.com
JUNEAU, BOLL & STACY, PLLC
15301 Spectrum Drive, Suite 300
Addison, Texas 75001
Telephone: (972) 866—8333
Facsimile: (972) 866—8378
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
MVARD 7 PEAINTWF S ORIGINAL PETITION & NOTICE OF WHIRH) mSCLOSURES PAGfi
Preview
FILED 1 CIT ESERVE DC_24_05295 “13/533332! DISTRICT CLERK CAUSE NO. DALLAS 00., TEXAS Cynthia R wmis DEPUTY JEFFREY HAVARD § IN TI-IE DISTRICT COURT OF Phintifi, § § v. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS § 298th MARIA TERESA RIVERA ROJ AS § Defendant. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION & NOTICE OF REQUIRED DISCLOSURES NOW COMES JEFFREY HAVARD (“Plaintiff”), and files this his Original Petition & Notice of Required Disclosures and in support thereof would respectfully show the Court as follows: I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN AND RULE 47 STATEMENT 1.01 Pursuant to Rule 190.1 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff intends that discovery be conducted under Discovery Control Plan Level Three. 1.02 Although Plaintiff believes that the ultimate decision regarding the amount of his damages falls within the purview of the jury, Rule 47 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure requires Plaintiff to Choose a specific claim for relief based on four categories under Rule 47. Due to this pleading requirement, Plaintiff pleads that he seeks “monetary relief over $250,000.00 but less than $1,000,000.00” Plaintiff reserves the right to amend his claim for monetary relief, if necessary, when discovery is substantially complete. II. PARTIES 2.01 Plaintiff JEFFREY HAVARD is an individual who resides in Wilmer, Dallas County, Texas. The last three digits of his TXDL are 803. The last three digits of his SNN are 618. 2.02 Defendant MARIA TERESA RIVERA ROJAS (hereinafter“Defendant ROJAS”) is an individual who resides in Dallas, Dallas County, Texas. She may be served with process at 3208 Darvany Drive, Dallas, Texas 75220. III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3.01 Plaintiff brings this negligence action to recover for personal injuries and other damages sustained as the result 0f a motor vehicle collision which occurred in Dallas County, Texas. This Court has personal jurisdiction over all parties because all are Texas residents. This court has subject matter jurisdiction over all claims asserted in this action because they are recognized MVARD 7 PEAINTWF S ORIGINAL PETITION & NOTICE OF MUIRE) ESCLOSURES PAGEI common law causes of action existing under Texas law, and Plaintiff seeks damages that are within the jurisdictional limits of this court. Venue is proper in Dallas County, Texas pursuant to Section 15.002(a)(1)&(2) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, because it is the county in which all or a substantial paIt of the events giving rise to the claim occurred and is the county of defendant’s residence at the time the cause of action accrued. IV. FACTUAL SUMMARY 4.01 This matter arises from a five vehicle collision on or about May 10, 2022. The collision occurred on the northbound lanes of Inwood Road in Dallas, Texas. At the time of the collision, Plaintiff was the restrained operator of a 2011 Ford F150 stopped at the stoplight at the intersection of Inwood Road and I35E Stemmons Freeway. Defendant Rojas was also headed northbound, behind Plaintiff, operating a 2007 Chevy Silverado. Defendant Rojas failed to control her speed and collided into the rear end of Plaintiff’s vehicle. The impact was forceful enough to push Plaintiff’s F150 into the vehicle in front of Plaintiff, starting a chain reaction and damaging five vehicles. Plaintiff suffered severe and permanent injuries. The wreck, injuries, and other damages suffered by Plaintiff were the direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant as more specifically described herein below. V. CAUSES OF ACTION Negligence - Defendant Roias: 5.01 At the time and on the occasion in question, Defendant Rojas, was negligent in the operation of her vehicle in the following specific respects, among others: a. Driver inattention; b. Failing to apply her brakes; c. Failing to control her speed; d. Failing to take evasive action; e. Failing to timely apply her brakes; f. Failing to maintain a proper lookout; g. Failing to take timely evasive action; h. Operating a motor vehicle without a license; Failing to maintain an assured safe stopping distance; j. Operating her vehicle at an unsafe speed for the conditions of traffic; and, k. Failing to reasonably and adequately follow safety instructions, regulations and laws. 5..02 Such negligence of Defendant Rojas proximately caused the incident in question, and the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiff as a result thereof. VARD AINTWF S RIGINAL TION OTICE OF UIRED SCIDSURES PAGE: Negligence Per Se: 5.03 Furthermore, the negligent actions of Defendant Rojas as set forth above constituted Violations of certain Texas state statutes governing the operation of motor vehicles on Texas roadways. Specifically, and without limitation, Defendant Rojas was negligent per se by Violating: (1) TEX. TRANS. CODE ANN .§545.062 by failing to keep an assured clear and safe distance between vehicles; and (2) TEX. TRANS. CODE ANN.§545.351 by driving a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent. At the time of the collision in question, Plaintiff was among the class of persons specifically intended to be afforded the protection of these statutes governing the operation of motor vehicles, and the collision, bodily injuries and other damages that resulted from each such violation of statute or ordinance was the very type of harm that each such statute or ordinance was intended to prevent. Accordingly, the doctrine of negligence per se is specifically applicable and attributable to the conduct of Defendant Rojas as described above. VI. DAMAGES 6.01 As a result of Defendant’s negligence, Plaintiff Jeffery Havard has suffered injuries and other damages including: a. Physical pain sustained in the past; b. Physical pain that, in reasonable probability, he will suffer in the future; c. Mental anguish sustained in the past; d. Mental anguish that, in reasonable probability, he will suffer in the future; e. Physical impairment sustained in the past; f. Physical impairment that, in reasonable probability, he will sustain in the future; g. Medical care expenses incurred in the past; h. Medical care expenses that, in reasonable probability, he will incur in the future; Loss of earning capacity sustained in the past; and j. Loss of earning capacity that, in reasonable probability, he will incur in the future; 6..02 Each of these damages was proximately caused by the negligence of Defendant and has damaged Plaintiff in a sum which is within the jurisdictional limits of this court. For such items of injury and damages, Plaintiff here and now sues. 6.03 Plaintiff also seeks recovery of his expenses and costs of suit, and pre—judgment and post-judgment interest at the highest rate permitted by law. VII. JURY DEMAND 7.01 Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues presented in this action pursuant to Rule 216 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. VARD AmeF S RIGHVAL TION OTICE OF UIRED SCIDSURES PAGE3 VIII. NOTICE OF REQUIRED INITIAL DISCLOSURES 8.01 Pursuant to Rule 194 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant must make initial disclosures, within thiIty (30) days after filing of the first answer or general appearance. IX. NOTICE 9.01 Pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 193.7, any and all documents produced by Defendant in response to Plaintiff’ s written discovery are intended to be used by Plaintiff and shall be deemed as properly authenticated for use against Defendant in any pretrial proceeding or trial in this case. X. PRAYER 10.01 WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffprays thatDefendant be cited to appear and answer herein, and that upon final trial of this cause, Plaintiff have and recover judgment against said Defendant for damages as set forth above, and for such other and further relief to which Plaintiff may show himself to be justly entitled. Re ectfully sub 'tted, JESSE A. C'ALDERON State Bar No. 24096649 icalderon @ ibsiniurylaw.com JUNEAU, BOLL & STACY, PLLC 15301 Spectrum Drive, Suite 300 Addison, Texas 75001 Telephone: (972) 866—8333 Facsimile: (972) 866—8378 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF MVARD 7 PEAINTWF S ORIGINAL PETITION & NOTICE OF WHIRH) mSCLOSURES PAGfi