Preview
Ralph
1156 El
A. Rizzo
Camino Real
FXLK>
MATEQ GQUN
San Carlos, CA 940770
C.S.B. 4 51426 NOV 1 Zot3
(650)594-1110
4 glo
Attorney for Defendant, Kenneth Ababseh OEPUTY CLERK
SUPERIOR COURT, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
10 LAILA ABABSEH, Case No. CLJ521868
Plaintiff, CROSS-DEFENDANT
KENNETH ABABSEH'S
12
ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT
3
FEL IC ITAS GALO, et a1
14 Defendants.
15
FELICITAS GALO,
16
Cross-Complainant.
17
VS.
18
KENNETH ABABSEH, RANIA ABABSEH,
And ROES 1 through 20, inclusive,
20
Cross-Defendants.
21
22 COMES NOW Cross-Defendant, Kenneth Ababseh, and in answer to
23 the Cross-Complaint of Felicitas Gala, admits, denies and alleges
as follows:
25 1. Cross-defendant denies, generally and specifically,
conjunctively and disjunctively, each and all of the allegations of
27 said Cross-Complaint and each and every cause of action and
paragraph therein contained as they may relate to this answering
1 Cross-defendant; and further denies that Cross-complainant has been
2 or is now or will be damaged to the extent alleged, or to any other
3 extent.
2. As for further, separate and distinct affirmative defenses,
this answering Cross-defendant alleges as follows:
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
That at the times and places referred to in said Cross-
7 Complaint, Cross-complainant was actively careless and negligent in
and about the matters and things referred to in said Cross-
Complaint, and such active carelessness and negligence on the part
10 of Cross-complainant proximately caused and contributed to the
11 happening of the incident in question and the resultant losses and
damages, if any there be.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
13
That Cross-complainant, with the exercise of reasonable
14
diligence and effort, could and should have mitigated the damages,
15
if any, complained of in said Cross-Complaint, which were directly
16
and proximately caused by the failure, neglect and refusal of Cross-
17
complainant to exercise reasonable diligence and effort to mitigate
18
the damages alleged.
19 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
20 That said incident and losses and damages complained of by
Cross-complainant, if any, were proximately caused by the sole
negligence, fault, acts, omissions, conduct and misconduct of
23 persons and entities other than this answering Cross-defendant.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
24
That the negligence or fault, if any, of this answering Cross-
25
defendant is comparatively less than that of the other defendants
26
and cross-defendants in this action and, therefore, any damages
27
recovered by Cross-complainant should be equitably apportioned
1 between and among each of the defendants and cross-defendants found
liable based on their proportionate share of fault.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
3
That said Cross-Complaint and each and every cause of action
4
5
therein contained fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a
cause of action against this answering Cross-defendant.
6
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
7
That pursuant to the provisions of California Civil Code
8
section 1431.2, the liability, if any, of Cross-Defendants other
9
than this answering Cross-Defendant, for non-economic damages shall
be allocated to said Cross-defendant in direct proportion to said
Cross-defendant's percentage of fault, if any, and a separate
judgment shall be rendered against said Cross-defendant for said
amount, if any.
14 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 That Cross-complainant's recovery, if any, must be limited to
economic damages pursuant to Civil Code section 3333.4.
17 WHEREFORE, Cross-defendant prays:
18 1. That Cross-complainant take nothing by way of her Cross-
19 complaint on file herein;
20
2. For costs of suit herein;
21
22
3. For attorney fees and costs pursuant to CCP 5128.5 and
23
5128.7; and
4. For such other and further relic th Court deems just
25 and proper.
26 DATED: November /K 2013
Z O4'
27 orner for ross-Defendant, Kenneth
abseh
PROOF OF SERVICE
I am over the age of 18 years and am not a party to this
action. My business address is 1156 El Camino Real, San
Carlos, California. On the date below I served''opy of the
ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT
and this page by placing them in a sealed envelope addresses
as shown below and depositing them in a U.S. Postal Service
mail box in San Carlos , California with postage fully
prepaid.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at Menlo Park, California t date low.
Dated: Nov., 2013
PH WRIZ
Jessica Nudelman
Pedersen, Eichenbaum & Lauderdale
1 Almaden Blvd, Ste 400
San Jose, CA 95113
Preview
Ralph 1156 El A. Rizzo Camino Real FXLK> MATEQ GQUN San Carlos, CA 940770 C.S.B. 4 51426 NOV 1 Zot3 (650)594-1110 4 glo Attorney for Defendant, Kenneth Ababseh OEPUTY CLERK SUPERIOR COURT, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 10 LAILA ABABSEH, Case No. CLJ521868 Plaintiff, CROSS-DEFENDANT KENNETH ABABSEH'S 12 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT 3 FEL IC ITAS GALO, et a1 14 Defendants. 15 FELICITAS GALO, 16 Cross-Complainant. 17 VS. 18 KENNETH ABABSEH, RANIA ABABSEH, And ROES 1 through 20, inclusive, 20 Cross-Defendants. 21 22 COMES NOW Cross-Defendant, Kenneth Ababseh, and in answer to 23 the Cross-Complaint of Felicitas Gala, admits, denies and alleges as follows: 25 1. Cross-defendant denies, generally and specifically, conjunctively and disjunctively, each and all of the allegations of 27 said Cross-Complaint and each and every cause of action and paragraph therein contained as they may relate to this answering 1 Cross-defendant; and further denies that Cross-complainant has been 2 or is now or will be damaged to the extent alleged, or to any other 3 extent. 2. As for further, separate and distinct affirmative defenses, this answering Cross-defendant alleges as follows: FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE That at the times and places referred to in said Cross- 7 Complaint, Cross-complainant was actively careless and negligent in and about the matters and things referred to in said Cross- Complaint, and such active carelessness and negligence on the part 10 of Cross-complainant proximately caused and contributed to the 11 happening of the incident in question and the resultant losses and damages, if any there be. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13 That Cross-complainant, with the exercise of reasonable 14 diligence and effort, could and should have mitigated the damages, 15 if any, complained of in said Cross-Complaint, which were directly 16 and proximately caused by the failure, neglect and refusal of Cross- 17 complainant to exercise reasonable diligence and effort to mitigate 18 the damages alleged. 19 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 That said incident and losses and damages complained of by Cross-complainant, if any, were proximately caused by the sole negligence, fault, acts, omissions, conduct and misconduct of 23 persons and entities other than this answering Cross-defendant. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 24 That the negligence or fault, if any, of this answering Cross- 25 defendant is comparatively less than that of the other defendants 26 and cross-defendants in this action and, therefore, any damages 27 recovered by Cross-complainant should be equitably apportioned 1 between and among each of the defendants and cross-defendants found liable based on their proportionate share of fault. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 3 That said Cross-Complaint and each and every cause of action 4 5 therein contained fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering Cross-defendant. 6 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 That pursuant to the provisions of California Civil Code 8 section 1431.2, the liability, if any, of Cross-Defendants other 9 than this answering Cross-Defendant, for non-economic damages shall be allocated to said Cross-defendant in direct proportion to said Cross-defendant's percentage of fault, if any, and a separate judgment shall be rendered against said Cross-defendant for said amount, if any. 14 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 That Cross-complainant's recovery, if any, must be limited to economic damages pursuant to Civil Code section 3333.4. 17 WHEREFORE, Cross-defendant prays: 18 1. That Cross-complainant take nothing by way of her Cross- 19 complaint on file herein; 20 2. For costs of suit herein; 21 22 3. For attorney fees and costs pursuant to CCP 5128.5 and 23 5128.7; and 4. For such other and further relic th Court deems just 25 and proper. 26 DATED: November /K 2013 Z O4' 27 orner for ross-Defendant, Kenneth abseh PROOF OF SERVICE I am over the age of 18 years and am not a party to this action. My business address is 1156 El Camino Real, San Carlos, California. On the date below I served''opy of the ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT and this page by placing them in a sealed envelope addresses as shown below and depositing them in a U.S. Postal Service mail box in San Carlos , California with postage fully prepaid. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Menlo Park, California t date low. Dated: Nov., 2013 PH WRIZ Jessica Nudelman Pedersen, Eichenbaum & Lauderdale 1 Almaden Blvd, Ste 400 San Jose, CA 95113