Preview
1 Robert L. Reisinger, Esq., Bar No. 156474
2 FORD, WALKER, HAGGERTY & BEHAR
One World Trade Center, 27th Floor
3 Long Beach, California 90831-2700
Telephone: (562) 983-2500
4 Email: RLRService@fwhb.com
5
Attorneys for Defendant,
6 AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
(sued erroneously herein as The American Automobile Association, Inc.)
7
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
COUNTY OF KERN - METROPOLITAN DIVISION JUSTICE BUILDING
10
11
JESS VILLASENOR, Case No. BCV-24-100154
12
Plaintiff, Hon. Bernard C. Barmann, Jr.
13
Dept. B-Civil
14 vs.
AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN
15 ARMEN JOE GASPARYAN dba CAL STATE CALIFORNIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
TOWING, MGJ CAL-STATE, INC., THE
16 AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION,
17 INC., TIMOTHY DOE, and DOES 1 to 100,
inclusive, CMC: July 15, 2024
18 Complaint Filed: January 16, 2024
Defendants.
19
20
21 COMES NOW Defendant, AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (sued
22 erroneously herein as The American Automobile Association, Inc.), and answering the unverified
23 Complaint, admits, denies and alleges:
GENERAL DENIAL
24
1. Under the provisions of Section 431.30(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of
25
California, this Defendant denies generally and specifically each, every and all of the allegations
26
contained in said unverified Complaint, and the whole thereof, and denies that Plaintiff was injured and
27
damaged as alleged, or at all.
28 ///
1
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 2. That the Complaint, and each and every cause of action contained therein, fails to set
3 forth facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering Defendant.
4 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
3. That the incident described in the Complaint on file herein, and the damages or injuries,
5
if any, sustained by Plaintiff, were directly and proximately caused and/or contributed to by the
6
wrongful, improper, careless and negligent manner in which Plaintiff, JESS VILLASENOR, conducted
7
himself and his activities at, near or about the time and place of the happening of said incident, which
8
conduct on the part of the Plaintiff shall serve to bar or proportionately reduce recovery herein. That the
9 acts of Plaintiff were negligent and were a legal cause of the injuries and damages, if any, which he
10 claims to have sustained as a result of the accident.
11 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
12 4. That Plaintiff is barred from recovery herein by reason of his own voluntary assumption of
13 risk in that each and all of the matters, conditions, acts and omissions of which Plaintiff complains were
fully known to Plaintiff and the risk and danger, if any, were voluntarily assumed by him.
14
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15
5. The Plaintiff were guilty of contributory, willful misconduct in and about the matters
16
complained of and that the aforesaid misconduct on Plaintiff’s part proximately contributed to the
17 happening of the incident and the damage, if any, sustained thereby.
18 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
19 6. Defendant places in issue the negligence or other tortious conduct of all persons, firms or
20 entities which caused or contributed in any degree to the happening of the incident as
21 alleged in the Complaint and to the injuries if any, and the damages, if any, suffered by Plaintiff as a
result of said incident.
22
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
23
7. That Plaintiff has failed to act reasonably to mitigate the injuries, if any, and damages, if
24
any, that are alleged in the Complaint. Such failure to mitigate on the part of the Plaintiff bars or reduces
25
his right to recover any damages against this answering Defendant.
26 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
27 8. That the negligence, if any, or the conduct of this answering Defendant (which allegation is
28 made for purposes of this pleading only and shall not be considered an admission) was not a substantial
2
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 factor in bringing about the Plaintiff’s alleged injuries and damages and, therefore, was not a contributing or
2 proximate cause thereof.
3 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
4 9. Defendant is informed and believe that the Complaint, and each and every cause of action
contained therein, is barred by applicable statutes of limitation, including, but not limited to, California
5
Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1.
6
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
7
10. That in the event this Defendants is found liable to Plaintiff, said liability should be reduced
8
by the percentage of fault attributable to Plaintiff and all others; and that said liability for non-economic
9 damages of this Defendant in several only, and not joint, so that this Defendant shall be responsible only for
10 the amount of non-economic damages allocated to it in direct proportion to its percentage of fault pursuant
11 to the provisions of California Civil Code, Section 1431.2.
12 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
13 11. This answering Defendant denies that the condition(s) as alleged in the Plaintiff’s
Complaint constituted a hazardous or defective condition(s); however, if said condition(s) is/are found to
14
have been hazardous or defective, this Defendant did not have actual or constructive notice of the same
15
prior to Plaintiff’s alleged accident and, therefore, did not have a reasonable opportunity to repair or
16
remedy such condition(s).
17 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
18 12. That if Plaintiff was not insured as required by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care
19 Act (PPACA) and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Plaintiff’s recovery herein, if
20 any, shall not include any medical expenses incurred on a lien basis. Alternatively, all medical expenses
21 incurred on a lien basis and/or paid by a private third party individual, business or company, shall be
reduced, and are only compensable, at reasonable reimbursable rates.
22
TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
23
13. Plaintiff's alleged claim for damages is speculative and lacks necessary evidentiary
24
support, as any purported evidence of unpaid medical bills are inadmissible and irrelevant to the
25
reasonable value of services provided and may not, as a matter of law, support an award of damages for
26 past or future medical expenses. (See Ochoa v. Dorado (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 120, 138-39; see also
27 Howell v. Hamilton (2011) 52 Cal.4th 541, 556; Corenbaum v. Lampkin (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1308,
28 1326.)
3
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:
2 14. Plaintiff’s claims that he remain obligated to pay certain medical bills for treatment
3 received in relation to his conditions or injuries allegedly a result of the subject accident are irrelevant to
4 any material issue of dispute in the present lawsuit. (See Ochoa v. Dorado (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 120,
138-39; see also Howell v. Hamilton (2011) 52 Cal.4th 541, 556; Corenbaum v. Lampkin (2013) 215
5
Cal.App.4th 1308, 1326.)
6
FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:
7
15. Defendant asserts that each and every purported cause of action contained in the Complaint
8
is barred because Defendant did not breach any duty to Plaintiff.
9 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:
10 16. Defendant did not owe any duty to Plaintiff to perform the acts alleged in the Complaint.
11 SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE:
12 17. Defendant asserts that if it is established that Defendant is in any manner legally
13 responsible for any of the damages claimed by Plaintiff in any of the causes of action in the Complaint,
such damages were proximately caused by other persons or entities over whom Defendant had no
14
control and Defendant is entitled to indemnity or contribution from these other parties.
15
SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
16
18. Defendant asserts that if it is established that Defendant is in any manner legally
17 responsible for any of the damages claimed by Plaintiff in any of the causes of action in his Complaint,
18 Defendant is entitled to a setoff of these damages with the damages that result from the wrongful acts of
19 Plaintiff and/or others.
20 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
21 19. Defendant asserts that each and every purported cause of action contained in the
Complaint is barred because the breach of duty, if any, was by third parties.
22
NINTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
23
20. Plaintiff voluntarily, and with full knowledge of the matters referred to in said Complaint,
24
assumed any and all of the risks, hazards, and perils of the circumstances referred to in said Complaint
25
and therefore assumed the risks of any injuries or damages sustained by said Plaintiff, if any at all.
26 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
27 21. Defendant asserts that Plaintiff’s injuries, if any, were caused by an “open and obvious”
28 condition of the property that Plaintiff did observe or should have observed and, therefore, Defendant
4
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 had no duty to provide Plaintiff with a warning of any allegedly dangerous condition, which condition is
2 denied.
3 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
4 22. Defendant asserts that the alleged defect in the property was trivial in nature and was not
a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s alleged accident.
5
TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
6
23. Defendant expressly and specifically reserves the right to amend this Answer to add,
7
delete, and/or modify affirmative defenses based upon legal theories, facts, and circumstances that may
8
or will be divulged through discovery and/or further investigation or legal analysis of Plaintiff’s position
9 in this litigation.
10 WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays that Plaintiff take nothing by reason of the
11 Complaint on file herein, that this answering Defendant be given judgment for costs of suit incurred
12 herein, and for such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
13 Dated: May 22, 2024
FORD, WALKER, HAGGERTY & BEHAR
14
15
16 BY:________________________________
ROBERT L. REISINGER
17 Attorneys for Defendant,
18 AUTMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2 Villasenor vs. Gasparyan, et al.
07924-027
3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
4 ) ss.
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
5
I am employed in the aforesaid county; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the
6 within entitled action; my business address is: One World Trade Center, 27th Floor, Long Beach,
7 California 90831-2700.
8 On May 22, 2024, I served the within ANSWER TO COMPLAINT on the interested parties in
said action,
9
10 David D. Geoulla, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Bita M. Azimi, Esq. Jess Villasenor
11 B&D LAW GROUP, APLC
12 10700 Santa Monica Boulevard, Ste. 200
Los Angeles, California 90025
13 Email: TeamBMA@bdinjurylawgroup.com
bita@bdinjurylawgroup.com
14
15 ☐ (BY MAIL) I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collecting and processing of documents
16 and correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Under that practice, on the above
date the envelope was sealed and placed for collection and mailing following the ordinary business
17 practices of our office. This results in the envelope being delivered to the United States Postal Service
in Long Beach, California, that same day, with postage thereon fully prepaid.
18
☒ (BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE) I caused such document to be Electronically Served on all parties
19 through the ONELEGAL for the above-entitled case. This service complies with CCP § 1010.6. The
20 file transmission was reported as complete and a copy of the “Filing Receipt” page will be maintained
with the original document in our office.
21
☐ (BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE) A copy of said document(s) was delivered by electronic
22 transmission to the addressee(s) pursuant to C.C.P.1010.6 I caused the documents to be sent from
mgarzone@fwhb.com to the person(s) at the electronic notification addresses listed above.
23
Executed on May 22, 2024, at Long Beach, California.
24
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true
25 and correct.
26
27 ___________________________________
Mary Garzone
28
6
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
Preview
1 Robert L. Reisinger, Esq., Bar No. 156474 2 FORD, WALKER, HAGGERTY & BEHAR One World Trade Center, 27th Floor 3 Long Beach, California 90831-2700 Telephone: (562) 983-2500 4 Email: RLRService@fwhb.com 5 Attorneys for Defendant, 6 AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (sued erroneously herein as The American Automobile Association, Inc.) 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF KERN - METROPOLITAN DIVISION JUSTICE BUILDING 10 11 JESS VILLASENOR, Case No. BCV-24-100154 12 Plaintiff, Hon. Bernard C. Barmann, Jr. 13 Dept. B-Civil 14 vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN 15 ARMEN JOE GASPARYAN dba CAL STATE CALIFORNIA’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT TOWING, MGJ CAL-STATE, INC., THE 16 AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, 17 INC., TIMOTHY DOE, and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, CMC: July 15, 2024 18 Complaint Filed: January 16, 2024 Defendants. 19 20 21 COMES NOW Defendant, AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (sued 22 erroneously herein as The American Automobile Association, Inc.), and answering the unverified 23 Complaint, admits, denies and alleges: GENERAL DENIAL 24 1. Under the provisions of Section 431.30(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of 25 California, this Defendant denies generally and specifically each, every and all of the allegations 26 contained in said unverified Complaint, and the whole thereof, and denies that Plaintiff was injured and 27 damaged as alleged, or at all. 28 /// 1 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 2. That the Complaint, and each and every cause of action contained therein, fails to set 3 forth facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering Defendant. 4 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 3. That the incident described in the Complaint on file herein, and the damages or injuries, 5 if any, sustained by Plaintiff, were directly and proximately caused and/or contributed to by the 6 wrongful, improper, careless and negligent manner in which Plaintiff, JESS VILLASENOR, conducted 7 himself and his activities at, near or about the time and place of the happening of said incident, which 8 conduct on the part of the Plaintiff shall serve to bar or proportionately reduce recovery herein. That the 9 acts of Plaintiff were negligent and were a legal cause of the injuries and damages, if any, which he 10 claims to have sustained as a result of the accident. 11 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 12 4. That Plaintiff is barred from recovery herein by reason of his own voluntary assumption of 13 risk in that each and all of the matters, conditions, acts and omissions of which Plaintiff complains were fully known to Plaintiff and the risk and danger, if any, were voluntarily assumed by him. 14 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 5. The Plaintiff were guilty of contributory, willful misconduct in and about the matters 16 complained of and that the aforesaid misconduct on Plaintiff’s part proximately contributed to the 17 happening of the incident and the damage, if any, sustained thereby. 18 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 19 6. Defendant places in issue the negligence or other tortious conduct of all persons, firms or 20 entities which caused or contributed in any degree to the happening of the incident as 21 alleged in the Complaint and to the injuries if any, and the damages, if any, suffered by Plaintiff as a result of said incident. 22 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 7. That Plaintiff has failed to act reasonably to mitigate the injuries, if any, and damages, if 24 any, that are alleged in the Complaint. Such failure to mitigate on the part of the Plaintiff bars or reduces 25 his right to recover any damages against this answering Defendant. 26 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 27 8. That the negligence, if any, or the conduct of this answering Defendant (which allegation is 28 made for purposes of this pleading only and shall not be considered an admission) was not a substantial 2 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 factor in bringing about the Plaintiff’s alleged injuries and damages and, therefore, was not a contributing or 2 proximate cause thereof. 3 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 4 9. Defendant is informed and believe that the Complaint, and each and every cause of action contained therein, is barred by applicable statutes of limitation, including, but not limited to, California 5 Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1. 6 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 10. That in the event this Defendants is found liable to Plaintiff, said liability should be reduced 8 by the percentage of fault attributable to Plaintiff and all others; and that said liability for non-economic 9 damages of this Defendant in several only, and not joint, so that this Defendant shall be responsible only for 10 the amount of non-economic damages allocated to it in direct proportion to its percentage of fault pursuant 11 to the provisions of California Civil Code, Section 1431.2. 12 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13 11. This answering Defendant denies that the condition(s) as alleged in the Plaintiff’s Complaint constituted a hazardous or defective condition(s); however, if said condition(s) is/are found to 14 have been hazardous or defective, this Defendant did not have actual or constructive notice of the same 15 prior to Plaintiff’s alleged accident and, therefore, did not have a reasonable opportunity to repair or 16 remedy such condition(s). 17 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 12. That if Plaintiff was not insured as required by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care 19 Act (PPACA) and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Plaintiff’s recovery herein, if 20 any, shall not include any medical expenses incurred on a lien basis. Alternatively, all medical expenses 21 incurred on a lien basis and/or paid by a private third party individual, business or company, shall be reduced, and are only compensable, at reasonable reimbursable rates. 22 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 13. Plaintiff's alleged claim for damages is speculative and lacks necessary evidentiary 24 support, as any purported evidence of unpaid medical bills are inadmissible and irrelevant to the 25 reasonable value of services provided and may not, as a matter of law, support an award of damages for 26 past or future medical expenses. (See Ochoa v. Dorado (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 120, 138-39; see also 27 Howell v. Hamilton (2011) 52 Cal.4th 541, 556; Corenbaum v. Lampkin (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1308, 28 1326.) 3 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE: 2 14. Plaintiff’s claims that he remain obligated to pay certain medical bills for treatment 3 received in relation to his conditions or injuries allegedly a result of the subject accident are irrelevant to 4 any material issue of dispute in the present lawsuit. (See Ochoa v. Dorado (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 120, 138-39; see also Howell v. Hamilton (2011) 52 Cal.4th 541, 556; Corenbaum v. Lampkin (2013) 215 5 Cal.App.4th 1308, 1326.) 6 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE: 7 15. Defendant asserts that each and every purported cause of action contained in the Complaint 8 is barred because Defendant did not breach any duty to Plaintiff. 9 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE: 10 16. Defendant did not owe any duty to Plaintiff to perform the acts alleged in the Complaint. 11 SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE: 12 17. Defendant asserts that if it is established that Defendant is in any manner legally 13 responsible for any of the damages claimed by Plaintiff in any of the causes of action in the Complaint, such damages were proximately caused by other persons or entities over whom Defendant had no 14 control and Defendant is entitled to indemnity or contribution from these other parties. 15 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 16 18. Defendant asserts that if it is established that Defendant is in any manner legally 17 responsible for any of the damages claimed by Plaintiff in any of the causes of action in his Complaint, 18 Defendant is entitled to a setoff of these damages with the damages that result from the wrongful acts of 19 Plaintiff and/or others. 20 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21 19. Defendant asserts that each and every purported cause of action contained in the Complaint is barred because the breach of duty, if any, was by third parties. 22 NINTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 20. Plaintiff voluntarily, and with full knowledge of the matters referred to in said Complaint, 24 assumed any and all of the risks, hazards, and perils of the circumstances referred to in said Complaint 25 and therefore assumed the risks of any injuries or damages sustained by said Plaintiff, if any at all. 26 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 27 21. Defendant asserts that Plaintiff’s injuries, if any, were caused by an “open and obvious” 28 condition of the property that Plaintiff did observe or should have observed and, therefore, Defendant 4 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 had no duty to provide Plaintiff with a warning of any allegedly dangerous condition, which condition is 2 denied. 3 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 4 22. Defendant asserts that the alleged defect in the property was trivial in nature and was not a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s alleged accident. 5 TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 6 23. Defendant expressly and specifically reserves the right to amend this Answer to add, 7 delete, and/or modify affirmative defenses based upon legal theories, facts, and circumstances that may 8 or will be divulged through discovery and/or further investigation or legal analysis of Plaintiff’s position 9 in this litigation. 10 WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays that Plaintiff take nothing by reason of the 11 Complaint on file herein, that this answering Defendant be given judgment for costs of suit incurred 12 herein, and for such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper. 13 Dated: May 22, 2024 FORD, WALKER, HAGGERTY & BEHAR 14 15 16 BY:________________________________ ROBERT L. REISINGER 17 Attorneys for Defendant, 18 AUTMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 Villasenor vs. Gasparyan, et al. 07924-027 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 4 ) ss. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) 5 I am employed in the aforesaid county; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the 6 within entitled action; my business address is: One World Trade Center, 27th Floor, Long Beach, 7 California 90831-2700. 8 On May 22, 2024, I served the within ANSWER TO COMPLAINT on the interested parties in said action, 9 10 David D. Geoulla, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff, Bita M. Azimi, Esq. Jess Villasenor 11 B&D LAW GROUP, APLC 12 10700 Santa Monica Boulevard, Ste. 200 Los Angeles, California 90025 13 Email: TeamBMA@bdinjurylawgroup.com bita@bdinjurylawgroup.com 14 15 ☐ (BY MAIL) I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collecting and processing of documents 16 and correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Under that practice, on the above date the envelope was sealed and placed for collection and mailing following the ordinary business 17 practices of our office. This results in the envelope being delivered to the United States Postal Service in Long Beach, California, that same day, with postage thereon fully prepaid. 18 ☒ (BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE) I caused such document to be Electronically Served on all parties 19 through the ONELEGAL for the above-entitled case. This service complies with CCP § 1010.6. The 20 file transmission was reported as complete and a copy of the “Filing Receipt” page will be maintained with the original document in our office. 21 ☐ (BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE) A copy of said document(s) was delivered by electronic 22 transmission to the addressee(s) pursuant to C.C.P.1010.6 I caused the documents to be sent from mgarzone@fwhb.com to the person(s) at the electronic notification addresses listed above. 23 Executed on May 22, 2024, at Long Beach, California. 24 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true 25 and correct. 26 27 ___________________________________ Mary Garzone 28 6 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT