Preview
THOMAS J.MURRAY, ESQ. 154245 '5‘“
--
s; r~
GEOFFREY .L.MEISNER, ESQ. 304.986 QC?) 7
b.)
KERN SEGAL & MURRAY
1388 Sutter 600
Street, Suite 28H EEC -| A 2= 0"]
San Francisco, CA 94109
Tel:(415)474-1900 (3;:"521:7. fr:
"1‘?
Fax: (415)474—0302 rn
'
" ‘ "
":7
L?
A" 'HWangb
Attorney for Defendants,
SUSAN M. CLARKE and ALBERT K. CLARKE
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
LALANI NAILAU, CASE NO.: 16CV299824
Plaintiff, SEPARATE STATEMENT OF
UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN
vs. SUPPORT 0F DEFENDANT ALBERT
K. CLARKE’S MOTION FOR
SUSAN M. CLARKE; ALBERT K. SUMMARY JUDGMENT; REQUEST
CLARKE; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 20, FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; AND
DECLARATION 0F SUSAN CLARKE
Defendants.
Date: February 15, 2018
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Dept: 9, Hon. Mary E. Arand
Trial: March l9, 2018
l9
20 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
2! PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that in support 0f Defendant ALBERT CLARKE’S
Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant hereby submits the following Separate
Statement 0f Undisputed Material Facts:
MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND
MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
#1 #1
SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SlLPI’ORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT
CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Filed by Fax
Plaintiff’s operative Complaint was filed
with the Court on September l3, 2016.
Supporting Evidence:
See Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice
of Plaintiff’s Complaint filed concurrently
herewith and attached as Exhibit A hereto
#2
Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges two causes of
action for motor vehicle negligence and
general negligence with respect t0 an
automobile accident that occurred on
August 19, 2015 on Summit Road at the
intersection with Old Santa Cruz Highway.
10
ll
Supporting Evidence:
See Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice
l2 0f Plaintiff” s Complaint filed concurrently
herewith and attached as Exhibit A hereto
l3
#3 #3
l4
15
Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges that Defendant
Susan M. Clarke was the operator of the
16 vehicle and goes on to further allege that
Albert K. Clarke employed Susan M.
17
Clarke, who was operating the motor
vehicle in the course ofher employment.
18
Supporting Evidence:
See Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice
20 of Plaintiff’s Complaint filed concurrently
herewith and attached as Exhibit A hereto
21
at pg. 4, paragraph MV-2. DEFENDANTS.
#4
23
Albert K. Clarke is Susan Clarke’s spouse
24 and does not employ her in any capacity.
Supporting Evidence:
26
See Declaration of Susan Clarke, attached
as Exhibit B hereto, paragraph 2.
27
#5 #5
28
SEPARATE STATEMENT 0F UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN suPPORT 0F DEFENDANT ALBERT
CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-
2 -
Defendant Susan M. Clarke was the sole
owner of the vehicle she was driving at the
time of the accident.
Supporting Evidence:
See Declaration of Susan Clarke, attached
as Exhibit B hereto, paragraph 3, Exhibits 1
and 2 attached thereto.
#6 #6
Defendant Susan Clarke was not on an
errand or performing any other task for
Albert Clarke at the time of the accident at
issue.
10
Supporting Evidence:
11
See Declaration of Susan Clarke, attached
as Exhibit B hereto, paragraph 4.
12
#7 #7
13
The sole basis for Plaintiff’s second cause
14
of action for General Negligence against
defendant Albert Clarke is as a co-owner of
the vehicle being driven by Susan Clarke at
16 the time of the accident.
17
Supporting Evidence:
See Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice
18
ofPlaintifi‘ s Complaint filed concurrently
l9 herewith and attached as Exhibit A hereto
at page 5.
20
21
22 DATED: fl/fi/7
KERN SEGAL & MURRAY
24
25
26
THO %/: S’J.
FREY
AtEtorney f0
M
D
.ME
RAE
dantsER
27 SUSAN M. CLARKE and ALBERT K.
CLARKE
28
SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT
CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
_3-
EXHIBIT ”A”
THOMAS J.MURRAY, ESQ, 154245
GEOFFREY L. MEISNER, ESQ. 304986
Ix) KERN SEGAL & MURRAY
1388 Sutter Street, Suite 600
b.)
San Francisco, CA 94109
Tel: (415) 474-1900
Fax: (415) 474-0302
U:
Attorney for Defendants,
SUSAN M. CLARKE and ALBERT K. CLARKE
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
LALANI NAILAU, CASE NO.: 16CV299824
Plaintiff, REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN
SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT
vs. CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
l4 SUSAN M. CLARKE; ALBERT K.
CLARKE; AND DOES 1THROUGH 20,
15
Date: February 15, 2018
Defendants. Time: 9:00 a.m.
216
Dept: 9, Hon. Mary E. Arand
/ Trial: March 19, 2018
l7
18 TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
19 Defendant ALBERT CLARKE hereby requests, pursuant to California Evidence
20 Code Sections 452 and 453, and in connection with Defendant’s concurrently filed Motion
21 for Summary Judgment, that this Court take Judicial Notice of the following Exhibit that is
contained in this Court’s own file:
///
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 1N SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT CLARKE‘S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Exhibit 1:_ Complaint of Plaintiff Lalani Nailau
(Filed September l3. 2016 and contained within this Court’s own file for
the subject action)
M
DATED; ///7°/7
KERN SEGAL & Y
By:
GEOF
/
?PHOMA .M
Y L. N
Attorney for Def d ,
SUSAN M. C and ALBERT K.
10 CLARKE
ll
12
l3
l4
15
l7
18
l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 1N SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT CLARKE’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGM ENT
- ’)
h _
EXHIBIT 1
EN 00R SEflo-Pmm
Anonwvmvmnmmom anon“ mm. suunusum ruhflyEzfiu
Riclde. Eichcnbuumjsq SEN 157065; Dan C. Selma:Esq.SEN 257737
Capmo 6c Van Der Walde LLP
5)Ia.Campbcn Am. suite no SEP l3 2mg
’
Campbell,CA 95008
Tmm
smawusuw;
1mm
"°=
(408) 733-0100
row manor
manna“:-
mum“
. l
191 N.
l9] N.
.
La am N
W WWW! (408) 733-0123
a)1 an, Pl aint'1 ff
aumm count or wanna. couuw or
ls! St.
ls: St.
Santa Clam
53-31:,931‘
BI
“V 3m‘4
~~-uGuwéx
W
v”;
,
mm
r!“
'
)
cmmnvcau: San Jose, CA 951 13
ammmu: Downtown Superior Court, Unlimited Jurisdiction
pumrr; Lalani Nailau
055mm Susan M. Clarke; Albert K. Clarke; and
m Does 1 to 20
COMPLAINTo-Ponorm Injury, Dam
E AMENDED (Number):
Property Damage. Wrongful
m MOTOR VEHICLE mD
typo (chock cl! that apply):
OTMER (WW):
Propcny Damna-
Pomonll injury
mu
E Wrongful Donut
OtherDamion: (aplclw: Exemplary
E
Jurisdiction (chock all
D
ACTION i3 A LIMITED
apply):
CIVILCASE
don not ncud £10,000
ml mun—
Amount dom-ndad
AO‘NON l8AN
D
UNUWED
Inna: $10,000. but don no! emu $25,000
CML 6M8 (ncudl 325.000)
1 6 C V 29 9 8 2 *5
D mm mud m
ACTION
D
t8RECLMSIHED by ml: amended complain:
mummu
9mm unnmlud to mama
1. (norm ornomu):
Plaintiff Lalani Nailau
mu
Illness
M.
ofIwon against dutnndam {name or names):
Susan Clarke;Alben K. Clarke; and Does l through 20
2, mum“
This plowing. Including and emu. consist: d mu Mowing numbor o! pagan:
6
3.
n. D
Each uninflfl nnmld abovc b I compobnt adun
D
oxccpl plalnflfl (mm):
w do businus In California
(1)
(2)E
D
a corporation qualmod
an unincorporahd
antlly (doscn'bo):
(3)
(4)m a
D
a minorD
public entity (doscdbn):
an ndun
D
(a)
(b)
0M
D whom a guardian
for
Other (specify):
(SPGQMI
ad mam has been appolnlad
or conservator ol tho estate or n guardian
b, D (5)
except
[:3
(1)
(name):
pialnlifl
a cotporauon qualified lo do businass
inCalilnmm
D
[:1
(2)
D
(3)
(4)
an unsmrporatod entity (describe).-
m
a pubiic Entity (describe):
a minor an adult
(a)C: whom a guatdian
tor orconsemlor estam or a guatdkan ad item has been appoinled
ol khe
(b)[:3 omey(spacity):
(5)[:3 other {specify}:
DWW Inlormafion about additiona! pIaInuHs who are no! computer“ adults
W
isshown Anachment
in 3.
Pm m ,
chw
'0'"
nunem
'°'
u0W:
ganumvy
fl
y :san
COMPLAINT—Personal Injury,
Damage, Wtonglul Death
Property C’“ °'
“33“,;359:
PLD-Pl—DM
SNORY TITLE: us: mew.
Nailau v. Clarke, cl al.
4. E Plenum
la
(name).-
nama
doing business under the fictiuous
(:peclry):
3rd ha: complied wfih Ibo flcfiflous business name laws.
5. Each defendant named above b a natural pawn
a. a D
except defendant (name): a a «a imam (name):
(1)
(2)
(3)
D
D
a bushes: organization. form unknown
a oomorafion
an unincorporated emny (demon):
(1)
(2)
(a)
D
E
abushes mganhafion. Vorm unknown
a corporation
anuninmzpomod anfity(dams):
(4)D a public amity {dotcn‘bo}: (4)D I pub“: mthy (dnscn‘ba):
(5) D other (specify): (5)a 00W (W):
b. D D
oxuptdafnndanunm): 1 D amp! dohndml (name):
D
(1)
(2)
(3)
D
D I eovpomion
bun unlmown
a basin.“ organizauon.
an unlncorpomted anmy (describe):
(1)
(2)
(3)
D aMnuaorganizalbmformunknmn
a 8mm
an unhoorporalad
entity (describe):
(4) E a pubflc Imhy (dlscrfla): (4)[j spam: muty (dam):
(5)C3 om (3mm.- (5)D O'MFMW'M!
B.
aTholru-nameso!
delendams who are not
Information about additional
dalmdam: sued as Docsm unknown (o plalnufl.
comalmd
natural persons
II InMadman! 5.
a. throng 20
Oo- datendants (special Doc nurnbeu): 1 1 worn theagoms or employees o! other
named defendants and acted wmn ma soaps 01 that agency or Imploympm.
b. (M
Doe dalendants Doe numbers):
lthrough 20 am pusons whom capacities are unknown
to
7. D plaintiff.
m
am blood undu Code cl CM Procedure suction 382
Delandants who (names):
8.
a.
b.
m
This coun Is lbs proper coon because
D m tout om dahndm now mum 1n us jmmcnonu am.
datondam cotporalion o: unhcorpomad assodaflon
Iha principal piece of buahass cl a us Judsdcliml urea.
II tn
c.
d,E person or damage Io personal propony occurred tn in jurisdlcflonal awe.
Injury lo
0mm {amdfl}:
9. DD Plalnlifl
lsrequiudtocomply with a claims and
statute.
a,
b.D has compflad wllh applicable dalms statutes. or
isexcused (ram camptymg because
(specify):
PLD-Ptom {Now Jammy L
3007] compumT—Porsonal Prop’eny
Injury, Duq-
2 nl I
Damage. Wrongful 09am
v
PLD-Pl~001
SHORY 1n L E: use wnasah
Nailauv. Clarke, ct
Bl.
10AThe lollwlng causes aflachcd and
oi action arn Ihasmamenls above have one or mom
appiy lo each (each complaint must
a. m
causes olacdan attachem:
m Mom Vahlde
b.
c. D
D
Genera! Nagflgance
Tm
lntenfional
d.
o.
f.
D
D
Products Llobflhy
Premises Liabaity
0m» (specify):
91an has suflorcd
11.
a. m
m wage Ion
a.
.
m
m
loudusa olptupuny
and mcdlcalexpenses
hospital
.
-
E WWW
OFGQQ
gontmlamage
naming capacity
loss o!
. otherdamage (spaclw:
Pre—judgmem pursuam
interest Code
to Civil section 3291
12.Da
a.
Tho dmgcs dim lot wrongtui dawn and Um nlwomhipc o!
mud In Madman! 12.
9W mad
to lh- are
b.C: es Vellum:
13. Tho nought
relic! complaint
In this lswilhkn tho jurisdiction o! this court.
14. prays
Plaintiff u
Io: judgment for costs o! suit; for
such renal and equnabh: and 1m
ls fair. Just.
a. (1)[I compensaluy damages
(2) puniflvo damage:
The amount o! damage: ls (in case:
for parsonnlhjwy or
wrmglui death, you must check
(1)):
(1)
(2) - accotdlng to proof
him amount0!:S
15. The paragraphs an Informsflon and
o! 1hr: complaint alleged belle! arc
as follows (speciyparagraph numbers):
5
Dara: Scptembcr l,2016
. l
Richard E. Exchcnbaum, Esq. ,
("FE OR PRM MM) WYDHS“ W5, MATTORNEY)
mmm M «mm Lmu COMPLAINT—Personal Ptopeny
Injury. p.337?)
Damage. Wrongful Death
PLD-Pl-OM (1)
SHOR‘I TITLE: CASE Quest:
Naiiau v.Clarke, e1
a1.
First CAUSE OF ACTION-Motor Vehicle
mm")
ATTACHLENT To Complaint E arm .oompuim
cram Iorm Iar each cause Median.)
(Use a sapamta cause
Puinufi Lalani Nailau
(name).-
MV- 1.Mama snag“ the acts o! defendants wars Mgfigam: [ha 3cm wm the legal Whale) cause o! injuries
and damages to pininfifl; Iha ads occurred
on(dale):August l9, 2015
a1 (place):
Summit Road, atimcrsccfion with Old Santa Cruz Highway, inunincorporated Sam: Clara County,
California.
MV- 2. DEFENDANTS
n. The defendant: who operand a motor which arc
(names):
Susan M. Clarke: and
m Does l lo 20
b. mow vohlcb In me course of malr amploymcm
The daflndams who ompbynd tho punch: who operated a
am (names):
Albert K. Clarke: and
c.
E Does l to 20
Tho deiondanl: who ownod tho molar vehicl- which was operated with their permission are (names):
Susan M. Clarke; Albert K. Clarke; and
d.
m Dons I to 20
Tho dammit who onmhd lho motor vnhldo In (names):
Albert K. Clarke: and
Encoul 1020
. Tho dofandnnuwhom (ha 39ml: am employ.” cum dnfondants
o! tbs and ucwd within the scope
wm
of m. agency (mmos):
Susan M. Clarke; Albert K. Clarke; and
Does l In 20
.‘
D land In Anachmml MV-Zl D
The defendants who am liable to plaintiffs for other masons and
s: Iolows:
me
tho reason: tornabimy are
Defendants. and each of them, are further liable to Plainfiff at common law and under Civil
Code section I714 for their faituu to cxercisc duc care under cxisting conditions, thereby
causing injuries and damages to Plaintiff.
Does JMW Io 20 __. Page W 4
~
“MW
macaw“"0”“
dmun
U” CAUSE OF ACTION—Motot Vehicle cw.
'39!
cm mm».
o:
1.1 1
am
mcmn‘hu 9w
?.D-HcmnMNHJAm-qnan
v.
PLD-PLOM (2)
ass mulch-
SHORT TITLE:
Nailau v. Clarke, ct al.
Second CAUSE OF ACTION—Genera! Negligence Page 5
(number)
ATTACHMEN? To Compam E3 Cross-Complain:
{Uso aupward cause of action
form breachwuss d action.)
GN-1. (name):
Plaintiff Lalani Nailau
auoges ma:dawn: (name): Susan M. Clarke; Albext K. Clarke; and
EMaLflm 20
was aun o(damagu Io
tho legal (proximate) By the
plaintiff. (0|me acts or omissbns lo act, deiendanl
damage
negligent» causad tho {o plaintiff
on August
(daft): 19,2015
Summit Rd, at
at (pace): Old Santa Cruz Hwy, Santa Cinra County,
intersection with CA
1W):
(doscrfpuon o! masons fat
On or about the above date, and at or about the above location. Plaintiff was a from seat passenger
operated by Defendant Susan M. Clarke. and owned by Defendants Susan M. Clarke
in a vehicle
and Albert K. Clarke.Defendant Susan M. Clarke was traveling southbound on Old Santa Cruz
Highway approaching a slop sign at tha intersection of Old Santa Cruz Highway and Summit
Road. Defendant Susan M. Clarke failed to stop at the stop sign conmlling traffic for her
on Summit Road.
direction of travel. and failed to yield the right of way to traffic As Defandam
Susan M. Clarke entered the intersection, the vehicle was struck by oncoming traffic. causing
serious injuries and damages to Plaintiff Nailau.
Susan M. Clarke violated California Vehiclc Code
In doing 1h: acts described above, Defendant
m yield the right of way to
sections 22450. for failing to stop at a stop sign. and 21802, for failing
from another highway. These statutes were enacted for safety purposes and
vehicles approaching
were designed lo protect people in the same class as Plaintiffs. that is. persons lawfully upon the
roadways. The violation of (hes: code sections were a cause of the subject incident. and of
Plaintiffs resultant injuries and damages.
Defendants, and each of them. are further liable lo Plaintiff at common law and under Civil Code
section 17 I4 for their failure to exercise due care under existing conditions, mereby causing
and damages to
injuries Plaintiff.
Preview
THOMAS J.MURRAY, ESQ. 154245 '5‘“ -- s; r~ GEOFFREY .L.MEISNER, ESQ. 304.986 QC?) 7 b.) KERN SEGAL & MURRAY 1388 Sutter 600 Street, Suite 28H EEC -| A 2= 0"] San Francisco, CA 94109 Tel:(415)474-1900 (3;:"521:7. fr: "1‘? Fax: (415)474—0302 rn ' " ‘ " ":7 L? A" 'HWangb Attorney for Defendants, SUSAN M. CLARKE and ALBERT K. CLARKE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CLARA COUNTY UNLIMITED JURISDICTION LALANI NAILAU, CASE NO.: 16CV299824 Plaintiff, SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN vs. SUPPORT 0F DEFENDANT ALBERT K. CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUSAN M. CLARKE; ALBERT K. SUMMARY JUDGMENT; REQUEST CLARKE; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 20, FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; AND DECLARATION 0F SUSAN CLARKE Defendants. Date: February 15, 2018 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept: 9, Hon. Mary E. Arand Trial: March l9, 2018 l9 20 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 2! PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that in support 0f Defendant ALBERT CLARKE’S Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant hereby submits the following Separate Statement 0f Undisputed Material Facts: MOVING PARTY’S UNDISPUTED OPPOSING PARTY’S RESPONSE AND MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE #1 #1 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SlLPI’ORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Filed by Fax Plaintiff’s operative Complaint was filed with the Court on September l3, 2016. Supporting Evidence: See Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice of Plaintiff’s Complaint filed concurrently herewith and attached as Exhibit A hereto #2 Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges two causes of action for motor vehicle negligence and general negligence with respect t0 an automobile accident that occurred on August 19, 2015 on Summit Road at the intersection with Old Santa Cruz Highway. 10 ll Supporting Evidence: See Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice l2 0f Plaintiff” s Complaint filed concurrently herewith and attached as Exhibit A hereto l3 #3 #3 l4 15 Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges that Defendant Susan M. Clarke was the operator of the 16 vehicle and goes on to further allege that Albert K. Clarke employed Susan M. 17 Clarke, who was operating the motor vehicle in the course ofher employment. 18 Supporting Evidence: See Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice 20 of Plaintiff’s Complaint filed concurrently herewith and attached as Exhibit A hereto 21 at pg. 4, paragraph MV-2. DEFENDANTS. #4 23 Albert K. Clarke is Susan Clarke’s spouse 24 and does not employ her in any capacity. Supporting Evidence: 26 See Declaration of Susan Clarke, attached as Exhibit B hereto, paragraph 2. 27 #5 #5 28 SEPARATE STATEMENT 0F UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN suPPORT 0F DEFENDANT ALBERT CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 2 - Defendant Susan M. Clarke was the sole owner of the vehicle she was driving at the time of the accident. Supporting Evidence: See Declaration of Susan Clarke, attached as Exhibit B hereto, paragraph 3, Exhibits 1 and 2 attached thereto. #6 #6 Defendant Susan Clarke was not on an errand or performing any other task for Albert Clarke at the time of the accident at issue. 10 Supporting Evidence: 11 See Declaration of Susan Clarke, attached as Exhibit B hereto, paragraph 4. 12 #7 #7 13 The sole basis for Plaintiff’s second cause 14 of action for General Negligence against defendant Albert Clarke is as a co-owner of the vehicle being driven by Susan Clarke at 16 the time of the accident. 17 Supporting Evidence: See Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice 18 ofPlaintifi‘ s Complaint filed concurrently l9 herewith and attached as Exhibit A hereto at page 5. 20 21 22 DATED: fl/fi/7 KERN SEGAL & MURRAY 24 25 26 THO %/: S’J. FREY AtEtorney f0 M D .ME RAE dantsER 27 SUSAN M. CLARKE and ALBERT K. CLARKE 28 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT _3- EXHIBIT ”A” THOMAS J.MURRAY, ESQ, 154245 GEOFFREY L. MEISNER, ESQ. 304986 Ix) KERN SEGAL & MURRAY 1388 Sutter Street, Suite 600 b.) San Francisco, CA 94109 Tel: (415) 474-1900 Fax: (415) 474-0302 U: Attorney for Defendants, SUSAN M. CLARKE and ALBERT K. CLARKE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CLARA COUNTY UNLIMITED JURISDICTION LALANI NAILAU, CASE NO.: 16CV299824 Plaintiff, REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT vs. CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT l4 SUSAN M. CLARKE; ALBERT K. CLARKE; AND DOES 1THROUGH 20, 15 Date: February 15, 2018 Defendants. Time: 9:00 a.m. 216 Dept: 9, Hon. Mary E. Arand / Trial: March 19, 2018 l7 18 TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 19 Defendant ALBERT CLARKE hereby requests, pursuant to California Evidence 20 Code Sections 452 and 453, and in connection with Defendant’s concurrently filed Motion 21 for Summary Judgment, that this Court take Judicial Notice of the following Exhibit that is contained in this Court’s own file: /// REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 1N SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT CLARKE‘S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Exhibit 1:_ Complaint of Plaintiff Lalani Nailau (Filed September l3. 2016 and contained within this Court’s own file for the subject action) M DATED; ///7°/7 KERN SEGAL & Y By: GEOF / ?PHOMA .M Y L. N Attorney for Def d , SUSAN M. C and ALBERT K. 10 CLARKE ll 12 l3 l4 15 l7 18 l9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 1N SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT ALBERT CLARKE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGM ENT - ’) h _ EXHIBIT 1 EN 00R SEflo-Pmm Anonwvmvmnmmom anon“ mm. suunusum ruhflyEzfiu Riclde. Eichcnbuumjsq SEN 157065; Dan C. Selma:Esq.SEN 257737 Capmo 6c Van Der Walde LLP 5)Ia.Campbcn Am. suite no SEP l3 2mg ’ Campbell,CA 95008 Tmm smawusuw; 1mm "°= (408) 733-0100 row manor manna“:- mum“ . l 191 N. l9] N. . La am N W WWW! (408) 733-0123 a)1 an, Pl aint'1 ff aumm count or wanna. couuw or ls! St. ls: St. Santa Clam 53-31:,931‘ BI “V 3m‘4 ~~-uGuwéx W v”; , mm r!“ ' ) cmmnvcau: San Jose, CA 951 13 ammmu: Downtown Superior Court, Unlimited Jurisdiction pumrr; Lalani Nailau 055mm Susan M. Clarke; Albert K. Clarke; and m Does 1 to 20 COMPLAINTo-Ponorm Injury, Dam E AMENDED (Number): Property Damage. Wrongful m MOTOR VEHICLE mD typo (chock cl! that apply): OTMER (WW): Propcny Damna- Pomonll injury mu E Wrongful Donut OtherDamion: (aplclw: Exemplary E Jurisdiction (chock all D ACTION i3 A LIMITED apply): CIVILCASE don not ncud £10,000 ml mun— Amount dom-ndad AO‘NON l8AN D UNUWED Inna: $10,000. but don no! emu $25,000 CML 6M8 (ncudl 325.000) 1 6 C V 29 9 8 2 *5 D mm mud m ACTION D t8RECLMSIHED by ml: amended complain: mummu 9mm unnmlud to mama 1. (norm ornomu): Plaintiff Lalani Nailau mu Illness M. ofIwon against dutnndam {name or names): Susan Clarke;Alben K. Clarke; and Does l through 20 2, mum“ This plowing. Including and emu. consist: d mu Mowing numbor o! pagan: 6 3. n. D Each uninflfl nnmld abovc b I compobnt adun D oxccpl plalnflfl (mm): w do businus In California (1) (2)E D a corporation qualmod an unincorporahd antlly (doscn'bo): (3) (4)m a D a minorD public entity (doscdbn): an ndun D (a) (b) 0M D whom a guardian for Other (specify): (SPGQMI ad mam has been appolnlad or conservator ol tho estate or n guardian b, D (5) except [:3 (1) (name): pialnlifl a cotporauon qualified lo do businass inCalilnmm D [:1 (2) D (3) (4) an unsmrporatod entity (describe).- m a pubiic Entity (describe): a minor an adult (a)C: whom a guatdian tor orconsemlor estam or a guatdkan ad item has been appoinled ol khe (b)[:3 omey(spacity): (5)[:3 other {specify}: DWW Inlormafion about additiona! pIaInuHs who are no! computer“ adults W isshown Anachment in 3. Pm m , chw '0'" nunem '°' u0W: ganumvy fl y :san COMPLAINT—Personal Injury, Damage, Wtonglul Death Property C’“ °' “33“,;359: PLD-Pl—DM SNORY TITLE: us: mew. Nailau v. Clarke, cl al. 4. E Plenum la (name).- nama doing business under the fictiuous (:peclry): 3rd ha: complied wfih Ibo flcfiflous business name laws. 5. Each defendant named above b a natural pawn a. a D except defendant (name): a a «a imam (name): (1) (2) (3) D D a bushes: organization. form unknown a oomorafion an unincorporated emny (demon): (1) (2) (a) D E abushes mganhafion. Vorm unknown a corporation anuninmzpomod anfity(dams): (4)D a public amity {dotcn‘bo}: (4)D I pub“: mthy (dnscn‘ba): (5) D other (specify): (5)a 00W (W): b. D D oxuptdafnndanunm): 1 D amp! dohndml (name): D (1) (2) (3) D D I eovpomion bun unlmown a basin.“ organizauon. an unlncorpomted anmy (describe): (1) (2) (3) D aMnuaorganizalbmformunknmn a 8mm an unhoorporalad entity (describe): (4) E a pubflc Imhy (dlscrfla): (4)[j spam: muty (dam): (5)C3 om (3mm.- (5)D O'MFMW'M! B. aTholru-nameso! delendams who are not Information about additional dalmdam: sued as Docsm unknown (o plalnufl. comalmd natural persons II InMadman! 5. a. throng 20 Oo- datendants (special Doc nurnbeu): 1 1 worn theagoms or employees o! other named defendants and acted wmn ma soaps 01 that agency or Imploympm. b. (M Doe dalendants Doe numbers): lthrough 20 am pusons whom capacities are unknown to 7. D plaintiff. m am blood undu Code cl CM Procedure suction 382 Delandants who (names): 8. a. b. m This coun Is lbs proper coon because D m tout om dahndm now mum 1n us jmmcnonu am. datondam cotporalion o: unhcorpomad assodaflon Iha principal piece of buahass cl a us Judsdcliml urea. II tn c. d,E person or damage Io personal propony occurred tn in jurisdlcflonal awe. Injury lo 0mm {amdfl}: 9. DD Plalnlifl lsrequiudtocomply with a claims and statute. a, b.D has compflad wllh applicable dalms statutes. or isexcused (ram camptymg because (specify): PLD-Ptom {Now Jammy L 3007] compumT—Porsonal Prop’eny Injury, Duq- 2 nl I Damage. Wrongful 09am v PLD-Pl~001 SHORY 1n L E: use wnasah Nailauv. Clarke, ct Bl. 10AThe lollwlng causes aflachcd and oi action arn Ihasmamenls above have one or mom appiy lo each (each complaint must a. m causes olacdan attachem: m Mom Vahlde b. c. D D Genera! Nagflgance Tm lntenfional d. o. f. D D Products Llobflhy Premises Liabaity 0m» (specify): 91an has suflorcd 11. a. m m wage Ion a. . m m loudusa olptupuny and mcdlcalexpenses hospital . - E WWW OFGQQ gontmlamage naming capacity loss o! . otherdamage (spaclw: Pre—judgmem pursuam interest Code to Civil section 3291 12.Da a. Tho dmgcs dim lot wrongtui dawn and Um nlwomhipc o! mud In Madman! 12. 9W mad to lh- are b.C: es Vellum: 13. Tho nought relic! complaint In this lswilhkn tho jurisdiction o! this court. 14. prays Plaintiff u Io: judgment for costs o! suit; for such renal and equnabh: and 1m ls fair. Just. a. (1)[I compensaluy damages (2) puniflvo damage: The amount o! damage: ls (in case: for parsonnlhjwy or wrmglui death, you must check (1)): (1) (2) - accotdlng to proof him amount0!:S 15. The paragraphs an Informsflon and o! 1hr: complaint alleged belle! arc as follows (speciyparagraph numbers): 5 Dara: Scptembcr l,2016 . l Richard E. Exchcnbaum, Esq. , ("FE OR PRM MM) WYDHS“ W5, MATTORNEY) mmm M «mm Lmu COMPLAINT—Personal Ptopeny Injury. p.337?) Damage. Wrongful Death PLD-Pl-OM (1) SHOR‘I TITLE: CASE Quest: Naiiau v.Clarke, e1 a1. First CAUSE OF ACTION-Motor Vehicle mm") ATTACHLENT To Complaint E arm .oompuim cram Iorm Iar each cause Median.) (Use a sapamta cause Puinufi Lalani Nailau (name).- MV- 1.Mama snag“ the acts o! defendants wars Mgfigam: [ha 3cm wm the legal Whale) cause o! injuries and damages to pininfifl; Iha ads occurred on(dale):August l9, 2015 a1 (place): Summit Road, atimcrsccfion with Old Santa Cruz Highway, inunincorporated Sam: Clara County, California. MV- 2. DEFENDANTS n. The defendant: who operand a motor which arc (names): Susan M. Clarke: and m Does l lo 20 b. mow vohlcb In me course of malr amploymcm The daflndams who ompbynd tho punch: who operated a am (names): Albert K. Clarke: and c. E Does l to 20 Tho deiondanl: who ownod tho molar vehicl- which was operated with their permission are (names): Susan M. Clarke; Albert K. Clarke; and d. m Dons I to 20 Tho dammit who onmhd lho motor vnhldo In (names): Albert K. Clarke: and Encoul 1020 . Tho dofandnnuwhom (ha 39ml: am employ.” cum dnfondants o! tbs and ucwd within the scope wm of m. agency (mmos): Susan M. Clarke; Albert K. Clarke; and Does l In 20 .‘ D land In Anachmml MV-Zl D The defendants who am liable to plaintiffs for other masons and s: Iolows: me tho reason: tornabimy are Defendants. and each of them, are further liable to Plainfiff at common law and under Civil Code section I714 for their faituu to cxercisc duc care under cxisting conditions, thereby causing injuries and damages to Plaintiff. Does JMW Io 20 __. Page W 4 ~ “MW macaw“"0”“ dmun U” CAUSE OF ACTION—Motot Vehicle cw. '39! cm mm». o: 1.1 1 am mcmn‘hu 9w ?.D-HcmnMNHJAm-qnan v. PLD-PLOM (2) ass mulch- SHORT TITLE: Nailau v. Clarke, ct al. Second CAUSE OF ACTION—Genera! Negligence Page 5 (number) ATTACHMEN? To Compam E3 Cross-Complain: {Uso aupward cause of action form breachwuss d action.) GN-1. (name): Plaintiff Lalani Nailau auoges ma:dawn: (name): Susan M. Clarke; Albext K. Clarke; and EMaLflm 20 was aun o(damagu Io tho legal (proximate) By the plaintiff. (0|me acts or omissbns lo act, deiendanl damage negligent» causad tho {o plaintiff on August (daft): 19,2015 Summit Rd, at at (pace): Old Santa Cruz Hwy, Santa Cinra County, intersection with CA 1W): (doscrfpuon o! masons fat On or about the above date, and at or about the above location. Plaintiff was a from seat passenger operated by Defendant Susan M. Clarke. and owned by Defendants Susan M. Clarke in a vehicle and Albert K. Clarke.Defendant Susan M. Clarke was traveling southbound on Old Santa Cruz Highway approaching a slop sign at tha intersection of Old Santa Cruz Highway and Summit Road. Defendant Susan M. Clarke failed to stop at the stop sign conmlling traffic for her on Summit Road. direction of travel. and failed to yield the right of way to traffic As Defandam Susan M. Clarke entered the intersection, the vehicle was struck by oncoming traffic. causing serious injuries and damages to Plaintiff Nailau. Susan M. Clarke violated California Vehiclc Code In doing 1h: acts described above, Defendant m yield the right of way to sections 22450. for failing to stop at a stop sign. and 21802, for failing from another highway. These statutes were enacted for safety purposes and vehicles approaching were designed lo protect people in the same class as Plaintiffs. that is. persons lawfully upon the roadways. The violation of (hes: code sections were a cause of the subject incident. and of Plaintiffs resultant injuries and damages. Defendants, and each of them. are further liable lo Plaintiff at common law and under Civil Code section 17 I4 for their failure to exercise due care under existing conditions, mereby causing and damages to injuries Plaintiff.