On January 22, 2010 a
Motion,Ex Parte
was filed
involving a dispute between
Cruz, Gerardo,
and
City Masonry Inc,
for PERSONAL INJ (NON-AUTO)
in the District Court of Harris County.
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
Document Filed Date
October 25, 2010
Case Filing Date
January 22, 2010
Category
PERSONAL INJ (NON-AUTO)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.