arrow left
arrow right
  • CRUZ, GERARDO vs. CITY MASONRY INC PERSONAL INJ (NON-AUTO) document preview
  • CRUZ, GERARDO vs. CITY MASONRY INC PERSONAL INJ (NON-AUTO) document preview
  • CRUZ, GERARDO vs. CITY MASONRY INC PERSONAL INJ (NON-AUTO) document preview
  • CRUZ, GERARDO vs. CITY MASONRY INC PERSONAL INJ (NON-AUTO) document preview
						
                                

Preview

Filed 10 October 25 P 1:32 Loren J ackson - District Clerk Harris Coun! ED101) 016023142 CAUSE NO. 2010-04488 By: Charlie Tezeno GERARDO CRUZ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Vv HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS CITY MASONRY, INC. 269" J UDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR NO-EVIDENCE SUMMARYJ UDGMENT TO THE HONORABLE J UDGE OF SAID COURT: Plaintiff, Gerardo Cruz, files this Motion for No-Evidence Summary J udgment pursuant to Tex.R.Civ.P. 166a(i) and in support shows as follows: |. Basis for Motion Defendant has asserted a number of affirmative defenses in this case on which it has the burden of proof. Defendant has not produced any evidence whatsoever supporting its alleged affirmative defenses. An adequate time for discovery has passed. Accordingly, Plaintiff moves for No-Evidence Summary Judgment on Defendant's affirmative defenses. Il. Factual Background 2 On or about J uly 21, 2009, Gerardo Cruz was injured when a forklift operator employed by City Masonry, Inc., caused a load of cement blocks to fall on Plaintiff causing a crushing injury to Plaintiffs right hand. The load was being moved by a forklift operated by an individual who was in the course and scope of his employment with Defendant, City Masonry, Inc. Ill. No-Evidence SummaryJ udgment Grounds 3 Defendant has asserted the following affirmative defenses in this case on which it must produce some evidence and/or have the burden of proof: a That Plaintiff was negligent and that such negligence was a proximate cause of the accident made the basis of this suit and any damages suffered by Plaintiff; and b That Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his damages. See Defendant's Original Answer attached hereto. IV. Arguments & Authorities 4 This case is currently set for trial on J anuary 3, 2011. Defendant has failed to produce any evidence whatsoever to support any of the above affirmative defenses. 5 Simply put, Defendant has no competent evidence to support any of these defenses. Accordingly, a No-Evidence Summary J udgment on the affirmative defenses listed above is appropriate. IV. Conclusion & Prayer WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that the Court, upon hearing this Motion, grant Plaintiffs Motion for No-Evidence Summary J udgment with respect to Defendant's alleged affirmative defenses set forth above. A proposed Order is attached for the Court’s convenience and consideration. Respectfully submitted, VUJ ASINOVIC & BECKCOM, PLLC /s/ Vuk S. Vujasinovic ~-----~~-~-~-~---~- +--+ +--+ +--+ +--+ VUK S. VUJ ASINOVIC SBN: 00794800 1001 Texas Ave, Suite 1020 Houston, Texas 77002 713.224.7800 713.224.7801 fax ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE | hereby certify that true and correct copies of the foregoing instrument have been forwarded to all counsel of record on this -------+ day of October, 2010, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. /s/ Vuk S. Vujasinovic ~a--—-------- VUK S. VUJ ASINOVIC