Preview
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
10/18/2019
10/13/2019 2:36PM
2 CIT ES FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DC-1 9-1 691 3 . .
Angle Avma
AVIna
CAUSE NO.
RODNEY BROWN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff, §
§
V. §
F-116TH
§ JUDICIAL DISTRICT
REYNALDO BAUTISTA, and §
IRMA BAUTISTA, §
Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COMES NOW PlaintiffRodney Brown and submits this, his Original Petition, and in support
thereof would respectfully show the Court as follows:
I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN
Plaintiff intends tot0 conduct discovery under Level 3.
II. PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
Plaintiff Rodney Brown isan individual Who
who resides in Dallas County, Texas.
Defendant Reynaldo Bautista is an individual residing at 17 14 Arbor Creek Drive, Garland,
Dallas County, Texas 75040, where he may be served with process.
Defendant Irma Bautista is an individual residing at 1 7 1 4 Arbor Creek Drive, Garland, Dallas
County, Texas 75040, Where where she may be With process.
served with
This Court hasjurisdiction
has jurisdiction over Plaintiffand Defendants because they are residents ofTexas.
Venue 0fthis
ofthis case is proper in Dallas County, Texas because it is the county in Which which the events that
give rise t0
to this lawsuit occurred. The amount of damages sought are Within
within this Court’s
jurisdictional limits. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages greater than $100,000.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -1
III. BACKGROUND FACTS
On or about December 20, 20 1 7, PlaintiffRodney Brown was driving his vehicle northbound
0n 1-35 in Dallas, Dallas County, Texas. Defendant was driving his vehicle behind the vehicle
directly behind Plaintiff. As Plaintiff was driving his vehicle in the slow moving traffic, Defendant
failed t0 control his speed and pay proper attention and collided into the rear 0f the vehicle behind
Plaintiff, pushing that vehicle into the rear ofPlaintiff’ s vehicle. The resulting collision and impact
caused the injuries and damages complained 0f in this lawsuit.
The vehicle being driven by Defendant Reynaldo Bautista was owned and/or controlled by
Defendant Irma Bautista. Upon information and belief, at the time 0f the accident, Defendant
Reynaldo Bautista was an unsafe 0r incompetent driver. Upon information and belief, Defendant
Irma Bautista entrusted Defendant Reynaldo Bautista with the use 0f her vehicle, and Defendant
Reynaldo Bautista used Defendant Inna Bautista’ s vehicle With permission and/or without obj ection.
IV. NEGLIGENCE
Defendants had a duty t0 exercise the degree of care that a reasonably careful person would
use to avoid harm t0 others under circumstances similar t0 those described herein. Plaintiff s injuries
were proximately caused by Defendants’ negligent, careless and reckless disregard 0f said duty. The
negligent, careless and reckless disregard of duty 0f Defendants consisted 0f, but is not limited to,
the following acts and omissions:
A. In that Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 keep a proper lookout for Plaintiff” s
safety that would have been maintained by a person 0f ordinary prudence under the
same or similar circumstances;
B. In that Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 control the maneuvering of his
automobile as an ordinary, prudent individual would have in the same or similar
situation;
C. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 pay attention, as an ordinary, prudent
individual would have in the same 0r similar situation;
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -2
D. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 apply his brakes, as an ordinary, prudent
individual would have in the same 0r similar situation;
E. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista followed Plaintiff s vehicle too closely; and
F. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 move his vehicle t0 the left or right t0 avoid
the collision, as an ordinary, prudent individual would have in the same or similar
situation.
Each and all of the foregoing acts 0f negligence were a proximate cause 0f the occurrence
made the basis of this suit and all of the damages and injuries sustained by Plaintiff.
V. NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT
Defendant Irma Bautista entrusted her vehicle t0 Defendant Reynaldo Bautista who was an
incompetent and/or reckless driver. Defendant Inna Bautista knew or reasonably should have known
that Defendant Reynaldo Bautista was an incompetent and/or reckless driver. The accident in
question was caused by Defendant Reynaldo Bautista’s negligent operation 0f Defendant Irma
Bautista’s motor vehicle, and said negligence proximately caused Plaintiff s injuries.
VI. DAMAGES
As a result of the negligence previously described, the Plaintiff was seriously injured. This
lawsuit is brought to recover for Plaintiff s injuries and for damages suffered that include but are not
limited to the following:
1. Physical impairment. Plaintiff has suffered in the past and Will suffer in the future
physical impairment.
2. Mental anguish. Mental anguish suffered by Plaintiff both in the past and t0 be
incurred in the future.
3. Pain and suffering. The pain and suffering suffered by Plaintiff both in the past and
t0 be incurred in the future.
4. Medical expenses. The medical expenses sustained by Plaintiff both in the past and
t0 be incurred in the future; and
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -3
Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount in excess 0f the minimum jurisdictional limits 0f
this Court.
VII. INTEREST
Plaintiff seeks pre- and post—judgment interest at the highest legal rate allowed by law.
VIII. JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff respectfully requests trial by jury.
IX. PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE TO DEFENDANTS
Pursuant t0 Rule 194, Defendants are requested to disclose the information or material
described in Rule 194.2 within fifty (50) days after the service 0f these requests.
X. PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffrequests that Defendants be cited t0 appear and answer and that 0n
final hearing, Plaintiffhave final judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, for an amount
within the jurisdictional limits of the Court, With pre- and post—judgment interest at the highest
lawful rate, costs 0f court, and for such other and further relief, at law or in equity, t0 Which Plaintiff
is justly entitled.
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -4
Respectfully submitted,
DUKE SETH, P.L.L.C.
/s/ Walker M. Duke
WALKER M. DUKE
Texas Bar No. 24036505
wduke@dukeseth.com
325 N. St. Paul Street
Suite 2220
Dallas, Texas 75201
(2 14) 965-8 1 00 Telephone
(214) 965-8101 Facsimile
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -5
Preview
FILED DALLAS COUNTY 10/18/2019 10/13/2019 2:36PM 2 CIT ES FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DC-1 9-1 691 3 . . Angle Avma AVIna CAUSE NO. RODNEY BROWN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, § § V. § F-116TH § JUDICIAL DISTRICT REYNALDO BAUTISTA, and § IRMA BAUTISTA, § Defendants. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COMES NOW PlaintiffRodney Brown and submits this, his Original Petition, and in support thereof would respectfully show the Court as follows: I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN Plaintiff intends tot0 conduct discovery under Level 3. II. PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE Plaintiff Rodney Brown isan individual Who who resides in Dallas County, Texas. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista is an individual residing at 17 14 Arbor Creek Drive, Garland, Dallas County, Texas 75040, where he may be served with process. Defendant Irma Bautista is an individual residing at 1 7 1 4 Arbor Creek Drive, Garland, Dallas County, Texas 75040, Where where she may be With process. served with This Court hasjurisdiction has jurisdiction over Plaintiffand Defendants because they are residents ofTexas. Venue 0fthis ofthis case is proper in Dallas County, Texas because it is the county in Which which the events that give rise t0 to this lawsuit occurred. The amount of damages sought are Within within this Court’s jurisdictional limits. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages greater than $100,000. PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -1 III. BACKGROUND FACTS On or about December 20, 20 1 7, PlaintiffRodney Brown was driving his vehicle northbound 0n 1-35 in Dallas, Dallas County, Texas. Defendant was driving his vehicle behind the vehicle directly behind Plaintiff. As Plaintiff was driving his vehicle in the slow moving traffic, Defendant failed t0 control his speed and pay proper attention and collided into the rear 0f the vehicle behind Plaintiff, pushing that vehicle into the rear ofPlaintiff’ s vehicle. The resulting collision and impact caused the injuries and damages complained 0f in this lawsuit. The vehicle being driven by Defendant Reynaldo Bautista was owned and/or controlled by Defendant Irma Bautista. Upon information and belief, at the time 0f the accident, Defendant Reynaldo Bautista was an unsafe 0r incompetent driver. Upon information and belief, Defendant Irma Bautista entrusted Defendant Reynaldo Bautista with the use 0f her vehicle, and Defendant Reynaldo Bautista used Defendant Inna Bautista’ s vehicle With permission and/or without obj ection. IV. NEGLIGENCE Defendants had a duty t0 exercise the degree of care that a reasonably careful person would use to avoid harm t0 others under circumstances similar t0 those described herein. Plaintiff s injuries were proximately caused by Defendants’ negligent, careless and reckless disregard 0f said duty. The negligent, careless and reckless disregard of duty 0f Defendants consisted 0f, but is not limited to, the following acts and omissions: A. In that Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 keep a proper lookout for Plaintiff” s safety that would have been maintained by a person 0f ordinary prudence under the same or similar circumstances; B. In that Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 control the maneuvering of his automobile as an ordinary, prudent individual would have in the same or similar situation; C. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 pay attention, as an ordinary, prudent individual would have in the same 0r similar situation; PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -2 D. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 apply his brakes, as an ordinary, prudent individual would have in the same 0r similar situation; E. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista followed Plaintiff s vehicle too closely; and F. Defendant Reynaldo Bautista failed t0 move his vehicle t0 the left or right t0 avoid the collision, as an ordinary, prudent individual would have in the same or similar situation. Each and all of the foregoing acts 0f negligence were a proximate cause 0f the occurrence made the basis of this suit and all of the damages and injuries sustained by Plaintiff. V. NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT Defendant Irma Bautista entrusted her vehicle t0 Defendant Reynaldo Bautista who was an incompetent and/or reckless driver. Defendant Inna Bautista knew or reasonably should have known that Defendant Reynaldo Bautista was an incompetent and/or reckless driver. The accident in question was caused by Defendant Reynaldo Bautista’s negligent operation 0f Defendant Irma Bautista’s motor vehicle, and said negligence proximately caused Plaintiff s injuries. VI. DAMAGES As a result of the negligence previously described, the Plaintiff was seriously injured. This lawsuit is brought to recover for Plaintiff s injuries and for damages suffered that include but are not limited to the following: 1. Physical impairment. Plaintiff has suffered in the past and Will suffer in the future physical impairment. 2. Mental anguish. Mental anguish suffered by Plaintiff both in the past and t0 be incurred in the future. 3. Pain and suffering. The pain and suffering suffered by Plaintiff both in the past and t0 be incurred in the future. 4. Medical expenses. The medical expenses sustained by Plaintiff both in the past and t0 be incurred in the future; and PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -3 Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount in excess 0f the minimum jurisdictional limits 0f this Court. VII. INTEREST Plaintiff seeks pre- and post—judgment interest at the highest legal rate allowed by law. VIII. JURY DEMAND Plaintiff respectfully requests trial by jury. IX. PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE TO DEFENDANTS Pursuant t0 Rule 194, Defendants are requested to disclose the information or material described in Rule 194.2 within fifty (50) days after the service 0f these requests. X. PRAYER WHEREFORE, Plaintiffrequests that Defendants be cited t0 appear and answer and that 0n final hearing, Plaintiffhave final judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, for an amount within the jurisdictional limits of the Court, With pre- and post—judgment interest at the highest lawful rate, costs 0f court, and for such other and further relief, at law or in equity, t0 Which Plaintiff is justly entitled. PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -4 Respectfully submitted, DUKE SETH, P.L.L.C. /s/ Walker M. Duke WALKER M. DUKE Texas Bar No. 24036505 wduke@dukeseth.com 325 N. St. Paul Street Suite 2220 Dallas, Texas 75201 (2 14) 965-8 1 00 Telephone (214) 965-8101 Facsimile ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION Page -5