Preview
1 THE MARQUART LAW GROUP
22342 Avenida Empresa, Suite 250
2 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
Tel: (949) 589-0150
3 Fax: (949) 589-0160
4 Jeffrey R. Marquart, Esq. (SBN 142663)
Derek J. VanDeviver, Esq. (SBN 227902)
5
6 Attorneys for Defendants COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, and RYDER LAST MILE,
INC.
7
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, ANACAPA DIVISION
10
11
12 STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE ) CASE NO. 24CV01902
13 COMPANY, )
) Assigned for all purposes to the:
14 Plaintiff, ) Honorable Thomas P. Anderle
) Department 3
15 v. )
) DEFENDANT RYDER LAST
16 COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, a ) MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT
17 Washington corporation; RYDER LAST MILE, )
INC., a California corporation; NAVR )
18 TRANSPORTATION, a California limited liability )
company; and DOES 1 – 20, Inclusive, )
19 )
Defendants. )
20
)
21
22 COMES NOW defendant, RYDER LAST MILE, INC. [hereinafter “Defendant”],
23 answering the unverified Complaint herein for itself alone, for no others, and by virtue of the
24 provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §431.30(d), now file this general denial, deny each and every
25 allegation of the complaint and all of the causes of action in each paragraph thereof, and deny that
26 plaintiff, STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, [hereinafter Plaintiff”], has
27 damaged in the sum or sums alleged, in any other sum, or at all.
28 / /
-1-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (FAILURE TO STATE CAUSE OF ACTION)
3 1. Plaintiff’s Complaint and each cause of action therein fails to state facts sufficient to
4 constitute a cause of action against this answering Defendant.
5 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
6 (STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS)
7 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint and each cause of action therein, separately, are barred by the
8 applicable statute of limitations, including, but not limited to, the statute of limitations set forth in
9 California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 337, 337.1, 337.6, 337.15, 338, 339, 340 and 343, among
10 others.
11 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
12 (COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE)
13 3. Answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the acts,
14 injuries, and damages, if any, alleged in the complaint either occurred and were proximately cause
15 by the sole negligence of Plaintiff’s subrogor, which sole negligence bars said Plaintiff’s recovery,
16 or were contributed to by Plaintiff’s subrogor’s negligence. Plaintiff’s recovery, if any, should be
17 reduced by an amount proportionate to the amount by which Plaintiff’s subrogor’s negligence
18 contributed to the happening of the alleged damages and the alleged injuries.
19 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
20 (ASSUMPTION OF RISK)
21 4. Answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at the time
22 and place referred to in the complaint, and before such event, Plaintiff’s subrogor knew,
23 appreciated, and understood each and every risk involved in placing himself/herself/themselves in
24 the position which he/she/they then assumed, and willingly, knowingly, and voluntarily assumed
25 each of such risks, including, but not limited to, damage to his /her/their property, or the property of
26 others, and the risk of bodily injury.
27 / /
28 / /
-2-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (IMPUTED NEGLIGENCE)
3 5. Answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that all events,
4 happenings and occurrences alleged in the complaint and the damages, if any, sustained as a result
5 thereof, were proximately caused and contributed to by the negligence and/or other fault of
6 Plaintiff’s subrogor or subrogor’s employer or co-employees with regard to the matters alleged,
7 herein barring, in whole or in part, said Plaintiff’s recovery herein.
8 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
9 (MITIGATION OF DAMAGES)
10 6. Plaintiff’s recovery against this answering Defendant, if any, is barred by Plaintiff’s
11 failure to mitigate the damages alleged in Plaintiff’s Complaint. If not completely barred, Plaintiff’s
12 recovery against this answering Defendant must be reduced to the extent that Plaintiff’s damages, if
13 any, were caused by Plaintiff’s failure to mitigate its damages properly.
14 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 (NEGLIGENCE OF THIRD PARTIES)
16 7. This answering Defendant denies that Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s subrogor were damaged
17 as a proximate result of any conduct on the part of this answering Defendant. This answering
18 Defendant affirmatively alleges that Plaintiff’s damages, if any, were proximately caused by the
19 independent conduct of third parties. Plaintiff’s recovery against this answering defendant, if any,
20 must thereof be reduced to the extent that those damages, if any, were caused by the independent
21 conduct of third parties.
22 EIGHT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
23 (CIVIL CODE SECTION 1431.2)
24 8. The right of Plaintiff to recover herein, if any right exists, is reduced and limited to
25 the percentage of negligence attributable to this answering Defendant pursuant to § 1431.2 of the
26 California Civil Code.
27 / /
28 / /
-3-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (COMPLAINT FRIVOLOUS AND IN BAD FAITH)
3 9. The Complaint is frivolous and is not based on good faith as to answering Defendant
4 within the meaning of California Code of Civil Procedure § 128.5 and 128.7, and Defendant is
5 entitled to recover reasonable expenses, including attorneys fees in defending this action.
6 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
7 (NEGLIGENCE OF EMPLOYER)
8 10. This answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all
9 times herein mentioned Plaintiff’s subrogor was an employee at the time of the accident alleged and
10 was acting within the course and scope of his/her employment. Defendant further alleges that
11 negligence and/or other fault on the part of Plaintiff’s subrogor’s employer or co-employees was a
12 proximate cause of the alleged damages to Plaintiff and that any money judgment awarded to
13 Plaintiff be reduced by the portion of Plaintiff’s total damages caused by said negligence and/or
14 other fault on the part of Plaintiff’s subrogor’s employer or co-employees.
15 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
16 (PLAINTIFF WAS A VOLUNTEER)
17 11. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff in satisfying the claim sued upon, acted officiously
18 and as a mere volunteer for its own purpose, without any obligation to its subrogor and without
19 interest in any such property, and thereby acquired no rights against this Defendant.
20 TWELVE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
21 (CONDUCT WITHIN THE STANDARD OF CARE)
22 12. Defendant’s conduct was reasonable at all times relevant herein.
23 THIRTEEN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
24 (SUBROGOR EXECUTED RELEASE)
25 13. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff’s claim for subrogation is barred by a Release and/or
26 contractual provision executed by its insured releasing Defendant from any and all liability in
27 connection with the underlying claim on which Plaintiff’s action for subrogation is based.
28 / /
-4-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (NO DUTY TO PLAINTIFF)
3 14. This answering Defendant owed no duty to Plaintiff herein.
4 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
5 (LACK OF STANDING)
6 15. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff lacks standing to bring the subject action as Plaintiff
7 has not received as assignment of any aspect of the claim from Plaintiff’s subrogor and as such,
8 does not have legal standing to proceed with this suit.
9 SIXTEEN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
10 (LACHES)
11 16. Plaintiff has unreasonably delayed the commencement of the action to the substantial
12 prejudice of Defendant and is, therefore, guilty of laches, and is precluded from recovery.
13 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
14 (UNCLEAN HANDS)
15 17. Plaintiff’s subrogor’s conduct with respect to the matters alleged in the complaint
16 deprive Plaintiff of clean hands and, by reason thereof, recovery is precluded in this action.
17 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
18 (ESTOPPEL)
19 18. Plaintiff is estopped by reason of its subrogor’s conduct from asserting any rights
20 which it may have against Defendant.
21 NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
22 (INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR)
23 19. The damages alleged herein, if any, resulted from an act or omission of an
24 independent contractor, and as such, this answering Defendant is not liable for such conduct or
25 resulting damages.
26 / /
27 / /
28 / /
-5-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (NO CAUSATION)
3 20. This answering Defendant denies that Plaintiff, or Plaintiff’s subrogor, was damaged
4 as a proximate result of any conduct on the part of this answering Defendant, and upon information
5 and belief alleges that as to each alleged cause of action set forth in the Complaint, and the damages
6 related thereto did not arise out of any act or omission by this answering Defendant, thus precluding
7 any recovery as against this answering Defendant.
8 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
9 (CIVIL CODE §3333.4)
10 21. The right of Plaintiff to recover herein, if any right exists, is reduced and limited
11 solely to the economic losses and pecuniary damages attributable to this answering Defendant
12 pursuant to Civil Code § 3333.4.
13 TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
14 (ACT OF GOD)
15 22. Any damages alleged in the Complaint were the result of an unavoidable accident
16 and occurred without any negligence, want of care, default, or other breach of duty, and were the
17 result of no human intervention, but were solely cause by a natural cause which no one could
18 reasonably be expected to anticipate and whose effects could not be prevented or controlled by the
19 exercise of prudence, diligence and care.
20 TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
21 (NON-ASCERTAINED DEFENSES)
22 23. This answering Defendant presently has insufficient knowledge or information upon
23 which to form a belief as to whether it may have an additional and, as yet unknown, affirmative
24 defenses. This Defendant reserves the right to assert additional defenses as may be appropriate.
25 //
26 / /
27 / /
28 / /
-6-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays for judgment that Plaintiff take nothing by
2 reason of Plaintiff’s Complaint on file herein, for judgment in favor of Defendant and against
3 Plaintiff, for costs of suit, including reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §
4 128.5 and § 128.7, and for such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper.
5
6 DATED: May 20, 2024 THE MARQUART LAW GROUP
7
8 By:
9 JEFFREY R. MARQUART
DEREK J. VANDEVIVER
10 Attorneys for Defendants
COSTCO WHOLESALE
11 CORPORATION, and RYDER
LAST MILE, INC.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-7-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2 I declare that I am over the age of eighteen (18) and not a party to this action. My business
address is 22342 Avenida Empresa, Suite 250, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
3
4 On May 20, 2024 I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing document described as,
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT: to be served on the
5 interested parties in this action, as follows:
6
7 SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
8 • BY MAIL: I am readily familiar with the business' practice for collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. I know that the
9 correspondence was deposited with the United States Postal Service on the same day this
declaration was executed in the ordinary course of business. I know that the envelope was
10 sealed and, with postage thereon fully prepaid, placed for collection and mailing on this date
11 in the United States mail at Rancho Santa Margarita, California.
12 • BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I caused the above referenced document(s) to be hand
delivered to the above-named person(s).
13
14 • BY FAX TRANSMISSION (C.C.P. § 1013(e); C.R.C. 2.306: The document listed above
was transmitted from fax number (310) 914-5401 to a fax machine maintained by the person
15 on whom the document is served at the fax telephone number set forth on the attached
Service List, on this date before 5:00 p.m., and a record of the transmission caused to be
16 printed showing the date and time of the transmission, and that the transmission was
reported as complete and without error.
17
BY ELECTRONIC MAIL: (C.C.P. § 1010.6; C.R.C. 2.251(a)(1)): I caused the
18
documents to be sent to the electronic notification addresses listed on the attached Service
19 List. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic
message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. My electronic
20 notification address is ASalazar@MarquartLawGroup.com.
21 Executed on May 20, 2024 at Rancho Santa Margarita, California.
22
(STATE) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
23 above is true and correct. (C.C.P. § 2015.5)
24
25
_____ ___________
26 Alexis Salazar, Declarant
27
28
-8-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 SERVICE LIST
2 Dominic J. Fiore, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Brian S. Letofsky, Esq. State Farm General Insurance Company
3
Watkins & Letofsky, LLP
4 2900 S Harbor Boulevard, Suite 240
Santa Ana, CA 92704
5 Tel: (949) 476-9400 | Fax: (949) 476-9407
Dfiore@wl-llp.com
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-9-
DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
Preview
1 THE MARQUART LAW GROUP 22342 Avenida Empresa, Suite 250 2 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 Tel: (949) 589-0150 3 Fax: (949) 589-0160 4 Jeffrey R. Marquart, Esq. (SBN 142663) Derek J. VanDeviver, Esq. (SBN 227902) 5 6 Attorneys for Defendants COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, and RYDER LAST MILE, INC. 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, ANACAPA DIVISION 10 11 12 STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE ) CASE NO. 24CV01902 13 COMPANY, ) ) Assigned for all purposes to the: 14 Plaintiff, ) Honorable Thomas P. Anderle ) Department 3 15 v. ) ) DEFENDANT RYDER LAST 16 COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, a ) MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 17 Washington corporation; RYDER LAST MILE, ) INC., a California corporation; NAVR ) 18 TRANSPORTATION, a California limited liability ) company; and DOES 1 – 20, Inclusive, ) 19 ) Defendants. ) 20 ) 21 22 COMES NOW defendant, RYDER LAST MILE, INC. [hereinafter “Defendant”], 23 answering the unverified Complaint herein for itself alone, for no others, and by virtue of the 24 provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §431.30(d), now file this general denial, deny each and every 25 allegation of the complaint and all of the causes of action in each paragraph thereof, and deny that 26 plaintiff, STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, [hereinafter Plaintiff”], has 27 damaged in the sum or sums alleged, in any other sum, or at all. 28 / / -1- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (FAILURE TO STATE CAUSE OF ACTION) 3 1. Plaintiff’s Complaint and each cause of action therein fails to state facts sufficient to 4 constitute a cause of action against this answering Defendant. 5 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 6 (STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS) 7 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint and each cause of action therein, separately, are barred by the 8 applicable statute of limitations, including, but not limited to, the statute of limitations set forth in 9 California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 337, 337.1, 337.6, 337.15, 338, 339, 340 and 343, among 10 others. 11 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 12 (COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE) 13 3. Answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the acts, 14 injuries, and damages, if any, alleged in the complaint either occurred and were proximately cause 15 by the sole negligence of Plaintiff’s subrogor, which sole negligence bars said Plaintiff’s recovery, 16 or were contributed to by Plaintiff’s subrogor’s negligence. Plaintiff’s recovery, if any, should be 17 reduced by an amount proportionate to the amount by which Plaintiff’s subrogor’s negligence 18 contributed to the happening of the alleged damages and the alleged injuries. 19 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 (ASSUMPTION OF RISK) 21 4. Answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at the time 22 and place referred to in the complaint, and before such event, Plaintiff’s subrogor knew, 23 appreciated, and understood each and every risk involved in placing himself/herself/themselves in 24 the position which he/she/they then assumed, and willingly, knowingly, and voluntarily assumed 25 each of such risks, including, but not limited to, damage to his /her/their property, or the property of 26 others, and the risk of bodily injury. 27 / / 28 / / -2- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (IMPUTED NEGLIGENCE) 3 5. Answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that all events, 4 happenings and occurrences alleged in the complaint and the damages, if any, sustained as a result 5 thereof, were proximately caused and contributed to by the negligence and/or other fault of 6 Plaintiff’s subrogor or subrogor’s employer or co-employees with regard to the matters alleged, 7 herein barring, in whole or in part, said Plaintiff’s recovery herein. 8 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 (MITIGATION OF DAMAGES) 10 6. Plaintiff’s recovery against this answering Defendant, if any, is barred by Plaintiff’s 11 failure to mitigate the damages alleged in Plaintiff’s Complaint. If not completely barred, Plaintiff’s 12 recovery against this answering Defendant must be reduced to the extent that Plaintiff’s damages, if 13 any, were caused by Plaintiff’s failure to mitigate its damages properly. 14 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 (NEGLIGENCE OF THIRD PARTIES) 16 7. This answering Defendant denies that Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s subrogor were damaged 17 as a proximate result of any conduct on the part of this answering Defendant. This answering 18 Defendant affirmatively alleges that Plaintiff’s damages, if any, were proximately caused by the 19 independent conduct of third parties. Plaintiff’s recovery against this answering defendant, if any, 20 must thereof be reduced to the extent that those damages, if any, were caused by the independent 21 conduct of third parties. 22 EIGHT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 (CIVIL CODE SECTION 1431.2) 24 8. The right of Plaintiff to recover herein, if any right exists, is reduced and limited to 25 the percentage of negligence attributable to this answering Defendant pursuant to § 1431.2 of the 26 California Civil Code. 27 / / 28 / / -3- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (COMPLAINT FRIVOLOUS AND IN BAD FAITH) 3 9. The Complaint is frivolous and is not based on good faith as to answering Defendant 4 within the meaning of California Code of Civil Procedure § 128.5 and 128.7, and Defendant is 5 entitled to recover reasonable expenses, including attorneys fees in defending this action. 6 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 (NEGLIGENCE OF EMPLOYER) 8 10. This answering Defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all 9 times herein mentioned Plaintiff’s subrogor was an employee at the time of the accident alleged and 10 was acting within the course and scope of his/her employment. Defendant further alleges that 11 negligence and/or other fault on the part of Plaintiff’s subrogor’s employer or co-employees was a 12 proximate cause of the alleged damages to Plaintiff and that any money judgment awarded to 13 Plaintiff be reduced by the portion of Plaintiff’s total damages caused by said negligence and/or 14 other fault on the part of Plaintiff’s subrogor’s employer or co-employees. 15 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 16 (PLAINTIFF WAS A VOLUNTEER) 17 11. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff in satisfying the claim sued upon, acted officiously 18 and as a mere volunteer for its own purpose, without any obligation to its subrogor and without 19 interest in any such property, and thereby acquired no rights against this Defendant. 20 TWELVE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21 (CONDUCT WITHIN THE STANDARD OF CARE) 22 12. Defendant’s conduct was reasonable at all times relevant herein. 23 THIRTEEN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 24 (SUBROGOR EXECUTED RELEASE) 25 13. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff’s claim for subrogation is barred by a Release and/or 26 contractual provision executed by its insured releasing Defendant from any and all liability in 27 connection with the underlying claim on which Plaintiff’s action for subrogation is based. 28 / / -4- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (NO DUTY TO PLAINTIFF) 3 14. This answering Defendant owed no duty to Plaintiff herein. 4 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 5 (LACK OF STANDING) 6 15. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff lacks standing to bring the subject action as Plaintiff 7 has not received as assignment of any aspect of the claim from Plaintiff’s subrogor and as such, 8 does not have legal standing to proceed with this suit. 9 SIXTEEN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 (LACHES) 11 16. Plaintiff has unreasonably delayed the commencement of the action to the substantial 12 prejudice of Defendant and is, therefore, guilty of laches, and is precluded from recovery. 13 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 (UNCLEAN HANDS) 15 17. Plaintiff’s subrogor’s conduct with respect to the matters alleged in the complaint 16 deprive Plaintiff of clean hands and, by reason thereof, recovery is precluded in this action. 17 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 (ESTOPPEL) 19 18. Plaintiff is estopped by reason of its subrogor’s conduct from asserting any rights 20 which it may have against Defendant. 21 NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 (INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR) 23 19. The damages alleged herein, if any, resulted from an act or omission of an 24 independent contractor, and as such, this answering Defendant is not liable for such conduct or 25 resulting damages. 26 / / 27 / / 28 / / -5- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (NO CAUSATION) 3 20. This answering Defendant denies that Plaintiff, or Plaintiff’s subrogor, was damaged 4 as a proximate result of any conduct on the part of this answering Defendant, and upon information 5 and belief alleges that as to each alleged cause of action set forth in the Complaint, and the damages 6 related thereto did not arise out of any act or omission by this answering Defendant, thus precluding 7 any recovery as against this answering Defendant. 8 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 (CIVIL CODE §3333.4) 10 21. The right of Plaintiff to recover herein, if any right exists, is reduced and limited 11 solely to the economic losses and pecuniary damages attributable to this answering Defendant 12 pursuant to Civil Code § 3333.4. 13 TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 (ACT OF GOD) 15 22. Any damages alleged in the Complaint were the result of an unavoidable accident 16 and occurred without any negligence, want of care, default, or other breach of duty, and were the 17 result of no human intervention, but were solely cause by a natural cause which no one could 18 reasonably be expected to anticipate and whose effects could not be prevented or controlled by the 19 exercise of prudence, diligence and care. 20 TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21 (NON-ASCERTAINED DEFENSES) 22 23. This answering Defendant presently has insufficient knowledge or information upon 23 which to form a belief as to whether it may have an additional and, as yet unknown, affirmative 24 defenses. This Defendant reserves the right to assert additional defenses as may be appropriate. 25 // 26 / / 27 / / 28 / / -6- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays for judgment that Plaintiff take nothing by 2 reason of Plaintiff’s Complaint on file herein, for judgment in favor of Defendant and against 3 Plaintiff, for costs of suit, including reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 4 128.5 and § 128.7, and for such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper. 5 6 DATED: May 20, 2024 THE MARQUART LAW GROUP 7 8 By: 9 JEFFREY R. MARQUART DEREK J. VANDEVIVER 10 Attorneys for Defendants COSTCO WHOLESALE 11 CORPORATION, and RYDER LAST MILE, INC. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -7- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I declare that I am over the age of eighteen (18) and not a party to this action. My business address is 22342 Avenida Empresa, Suite 250, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 3 4 On May 20, 2024 I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing document described as, DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT: to be served on the 5 interested parties in this action, as follows: 6 7 SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST 8 • BY MAIL: I am readily familiar with the business' practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. I know that the 9 correspondence was deposited with the United States Postal Service on the same day this declaration was executed in the ordinary course of business. I know that the envelope was 10 sealed and, with postage thereon fully prepaid, placed for collection and mailing on this date 11 in the United States mail at Rancho Santa Margarita, California. 12 • BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I caused the above referenced document(s) to be hand delivered to the above-named person(s). 13 14 • BY FAX TRANSMISSION (C.C.P. § 1013(e); C.R.C. 2.306: The document listed above was transmitted from fax number (310) 914-5401 to a fax machine maintained by the person 15 on whom the document is served at the fax telephone number set forth on the attached Service List, on this date before 5:00 p.m., and a record of the transmission caused to be 16 printed showing the date and time of the transmission, and that the transmission was reported as complete and without error. 17 BY ELECTRONIC MAIL: (C.C.P. § 1010.6; C.R.C. 2.251(a)(1)): I caused the 18 documents to be sent to the electronic notification addresses listed on the attached Service 19 List. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. My electronic 20 notification address is ASalazar@MarquartLawGroup.com. 21 Executed on May 20, 2024 at Rancho Santa Margarita, California. 22 (STATE) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 23 above is true and correct. (C.C.P. § 2015.5) 24 25 _____ ___________ 26 Alexis Salazar, Declarant 27 28 -8- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 SERVICE LIST 2 Dominic J. Fiore, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff, Brian S. Letofsky, Esq. State Farm General Insurance Company 3 Watkins & Letofsky, LLP 4 2900 S Harbor Boulevard, Suite 240 Santa Ana, CA 92704 5 Tel: (949) 476-9400 | Fax: (949) 476-9407 Dfiore@wl-llp.com 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -9- DEFENDANT RYDER LAST MILE, INC.’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT