Preview
Electronically Filed
11/13/2020 7:45 PM
Superior Court of California
1 STEVE R. SHERMAN (State Bar No. 136589) County of Stanislaus
JGPC BUSINESS LAW PC
5890 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 102 Clerk of the Court
2
Pleasanton, CA 94588 By: Sabrina Bouldt, Deputy
3 Phone: 925-463-9600
Fax: 925-463-9644 $435 PAID
4
Attorneys for Defendants and Cross-Complainants
5 TED P. RUTKOWSKY and SUSAN J. RUTKOWSKY
6
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF STANISLAUS - UNLIMITED DIVISION
10
11 A&A INVESTMENTS AND AUTO INC., a Case No. CV-20-002360
California corporation; JAIRAJ DHILLON,
12 an individual; and TEJWINDER K. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
DHILLON, an individual,
13
Plaintiffs,
14
vs.
15
TED P. RUTKOWSKY, an individual;
16 SUSAN J. RUTKOWSKY, an individual;
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
17 inclusive,
18 Defendants.
19 TED P. RUTKOWSKY, an individual;
SUSAN J. RUTKOWSKY, an individual,
20
Cross-Complainants,
21
vs.
22
A&A INVESTMENTS AND AUTO INC., a
23 California corporation; JAIRAJ DHILLON,
an individual; and TEJWINDER K.
24 DHILLON, and ROES 1 through 20,
inclusive,
25
Cross-Defendants.
26
///
27
28 ///
Answer to Complaint 1
1 COME NOW Defendants TED P. RUTKOWSKY and SUSAN J. RUTKOWSKY, and
2 hereby respond to the Complaint of A&A INVESTMENTS AND AUTO INC., JAIRAJ
3 DHILLON, and TEJWINDER K. DHILLON as follows:
4 1. In answering the Complaint on file herein, pursuant to the provision of Code
5 of Civil Procedure §431.30, these answering Defendants deny each and every allegation of
6 the Complaint herein, both generally and specifically, and particularly deny that Plaintiffs
7 sustained damages in the sum alleged, or any sum at all
8 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
9 2. The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, fails to set forth facts
10 sufficient to constitute a cause of action against these answering Defendants.
11 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
12 3. Plaintiffs’ conduct contributed to the alleged damages and Plaintiffs’ amount
13 of recovery, if any, shall be reduced on the basis of their own comparative negligence
14 and/or the negligence of their agents or employees, which contributed to the alleged
15 damages upon which Plaintiffs are seeking recovery against these answering Defendants.
16 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
17 4. The injuries and damages alleged in the Cross-Complaint were proximately
18 cause or contributed to by the negligence or other acts or omissions of other Defendants,
19 persons or entities, and said negligence or other acts or omissions were an intervening and
20 superseding cause of damages, if any, of which Plaintiffs complains.
21 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
22 5. At all times relevant hereto, these answering Defendants allege that Plaintiffs
23 could have, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, limited or prevented Plaintiffs’
24 damages, if any, as a result of the events in the Complaint, and each and every cause of
25 action contained therein, and that Plaintiffs failed or refused to do so. Such failure or
26 refusal on the part of Plaintiffs constitutes a failure to mitigate Plaintiffs’ damages.
27 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
28 6. At all times herein relevant, Plaintiffs have exhibited unclean hands, and, as a
Answer to Complaint 2
1 result, should preclude from enforcing any legal or equitable remedy as alleged in the
2 Complaint.
3 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
4 7. These answering Defendants are informed and believe, and based upon
5 such information and belief, allege that Plaintiffs have waived their right to seek relief
6 herein due to Plaintiffs’ own acts and/or omissions with reference to the subject matter of
7 the Cross-Complaint.
8 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
9 8. At all times herein relevant, Plaintiffs’ conduct was such so as to render said
10 Plaintiffs guilty of laches such that these answering Defendants reasonably relied upon
11 Plaintiffs’ conduct to their detriment. Plaintiffs are precluded from maintaining this action
12 by reason of the unreasonable and long delay in commencing this action which delay
13 materially prejudiced the position of these answering Defendants.
14 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 9. At all times herein relevant, these answering Defendants allege that Plaintiffs
16 is estopped from recovering the relief sought within Plaintiffs’ Cross-Complaint
17 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
18 10. Plaintiffs breached conditions and covenants of the alleged contract, if any
19 such contract existed, and/or failed to execute documents necessary to carry out the
20 purpose and intent of the contract. As a result of Plaintiffs’ breach, Plaintiffs’ recovery
21 should be barred or reduced thereby.
22 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
23 11. Plaintiffs are barred from any recovery against these answering Defendants
24 for any breach of contract claim because these answering Defendants complied with all the
25 terms of the alleged contract.
26 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
27 12. At all times herein relevant, these answering Defendants’ performance under
28 the alleged contract, if any contract existed at all, was excused.
Answer to Complaint 3
1 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 13. These answering Defendants affirmatively alleges that they are entitled to a
3 set-off of all money they may become obligated to pay to Plaintiffs herein against any
4 money which Plaintiffs herein owe or may become obliged to pay to these answering
5 Defendants.
6 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
7 14. Plaintiffs’ claims against these answering Defendants are barred by the
8 statute of frauds.
9 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
10 15. Plaintiffs’ claims against these answering Defendants are barred by the
11 statutes of limitations set forth in Code of Civil Procedure §§337(1) and (3), 338(d), 339(1)
12 and (3), 340 (3) and (5).
13 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
14 16. At all times herein relevant, Defendants allege that each and every act done
15 or statement made by said Defendants, their officers, agents or employees, with reference
16 to some or all of the purported claims set forth in the Cross-Complaint herein, were made
17 reasonably and in good faith, and without any knowledge that said statements might be
18 false or inaccurate.
19 WHEREFORE, these answering Defendants pray for judgment as follows:
20 1. That Plaintiffs take nothing by their Cross-Complaint;
21 2. That Defendants be awarded their costs of suit and attorney’s fees; and
22 3. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
23 Dated: November 13, 2020 JGPC BUSINESS LAW PC
24
25 By: _____________________________
STEVE R. SHERMAN
26 Attorneys for Defendants and Cross-
Complainants TED P. RUTKOWSKY and SUSAN
27 J. RUTKOWSKY
28
Answer to Complaint 4
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
(Code of Civil Procedure §1013a)
2
I, the undersigned, declare that I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State
3 of California employed in the County of Alameda, State of California. I am over eighteen (18) years
of age and not a party to the above-entitled action. My business address is 5890 Stoneridge Drive,
4
Suite 102, Pleasanton, CA 94588. On November 13, 2020, I served the following document(s) in
the manner indicated below:
5
6 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
7 ( ) U.S. Mail: I am readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing and, after placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope,
8 with First class postage thereon fully prepaid and addressed as set forth below, I left it at a place
where, in the ordinary course of business, the mail is picked up for delivery, or, alternatively, by
9 depositing same with the U.S. Postal Service, at Pleasanton, CA. (CCP §1013(a))
10 ( ) Via Messenger: By causing personal delivery via messenger of the document(s) listed
above to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth below.
11
( ) Personal Delivery: By personally delivering the document(s) listed above to the person(s)
12 at the address(es) noted below. (CCP §1011)
13 ( ) Overnight Delivery: By placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope and
marked for next-day delivery by United Parcel Service Next Day Air (delivery method). (CCP
14 §1013(c))
15
(XX) Via Electronic Transmission: By causing delivery via email transmission of the document(s)
listed above to the person(s) at the email address(es) set forth below. (CCP §1013(e))
16
17 Justin Vecchiarelli, Esq.
Proper Defense Law Corporation
18 677 W. Palmdon Drive, Suite 201
Fresno, CA 93704
19
justin@properdefenselaw.com
20
cc: linda@properdefenselaw.com
21
22
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and
correct. Executed on November 13, 2020, at Pleasanton, California.
23
24
Kristina Hudelson
25 Kristina Hudelson
26
27
28
Certificate of Mailing per CCP §1013
Preview
Electronically Filed 11/13/2020 7:45 PM Superior Court of California 1 STEVE R. SHERMAN (State Bar No. 136589) County of Stanislaus JGPC BUSINESS LAW PC 5890 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 102 Clerk of the Court 2 Pleasanton, CA 94588 By: Sabrina Bouldt, Deputy 3 Phone: 925-463-9600 Fax: 925-463-9644 $435 PAID 4 Attorneys for Defendants and Cross-Complainants 5 TED P. RUTKOWSKY and SUSAN J. RUTKOWSKY 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF STANISLAUS - UNLIMITED DIVISION 10 11 A&A INVESTMENTS AND AUTO INC., a Case No. CV-20-002360 California corporation; JAIRAJ DHILLON, 12 an individual; and TEJWINDER K. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT DHILLON, an individual, 13 Plaintiffs, 14 vs. 15 TED P. RUTKOWSKY, an individual; 16 SUSAN J. RUTKOWSKY, an individual; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, 17 inclusive, 18 Defendants. 19 TED P. RUTKOWSKY, an individual; SUSAN J. RUTKOWSKY, an individual, 20 Cross-Complainants, 21 vs. 22 A&A INVESTMENTS AND AUTO INC., a 23 California corporation; JAIRAJ DHILLON, an individual; and TEJWINDER K. 24 DHILLON, and ROES 1 through 20, inclusive, 25 Cross-Defendants. 26 /// 27 28 /// Answer to Complaint 1 1 COME NOW Defendants TED P. RUTKOWSKY and SUSAN J. RUTKOWSKY, and 2 hereby respond to the Complaint of A&A INVESTMENTS AND AUTO INC., JAIRAJ 3 DHILLON, and TEJWINDER K. DHILLON as follows: 4 1. In answering the Complaint on file herein, pursuant to the provision of Code 5 of Civil Procedure §431.30, these answering Defendants deny each and every allegation of 6 the Complaint herein, both generally and specifically, and particularly deny that Plaintiffs 7 sustained damages in the sum alleged, or any sum at all 8 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 2. The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, fails to set forth facts 10 sufficient to constitute a cause of action against these answering Defendants. 11 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 12 3. Plaintiffs’ conduct contributed to the alleged damages and Plaintiffs’ amount 13 of recovery, if any, shall be reduced on the basis of their own comparative negligence 14 and/or the negligence of their agents or employees, which contributed to the alleged 15 damages upon which Plaintiffs are seeking recovery against these answering Defendants. 16 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 4. The injuries and damages alleged in the Cross-Complaint were proximately 18 cause or contributed to by the negligence or other acts or omissions of other Defendants, 19 persons or entities, and said negligence or other acts or omissions were an intervening and 20 superseding cause of damages, if any, of which Plaintiffs complains. 21 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 5. At all times relevant hereto, these answering Defendants allege that Plaintiffs 23 could have, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, limited or prevented Plaintiffs’ 24 damages, if any, as a result of the events in the Complaint, and each and every cause of 25 action contained therein, and that Plaintiffs failed or refused to do so. Such failure or 26 refusal on the part of Plaintiffs constitutes a failure to mitigate Plaintiffs’ damages. 27 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 28 6. At all times herein relevant, Plaintiffs have exhibited unclean hands, and, as a Answer to Complaint 2 1 result, should preclude from enforcing any legal or equitable remedy as alleged in the 2 Complaint. 3 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 4 7. These answering Defendants are informed and believe, and based upon 5 such information and belief, allege that Plaintiffs have waived their right to seek relief 6 herein due to Plaintiffs’ own acts and/or omissions with reference to the subject matter of 7 the Cross-Complaint. 8 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 8. At all times herein relevant, Plaintiffs’ conduct was such so as to render said 10 Plaintiffs guilty of laches such that these answering Defendants reasonably relied upon 11 Plaintiffs’ conduct to their detriment. Plaintiffs are precluded from maintaining this action 12 by reason of the unreasonable and long delay in commencing this action which delay 13 materially prejudiced the position of these answering Defendants. 14 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 9. At all times herein relevant, these answering Defendants allege that Plaintiffs 16 is estopped from recovering the relief sought within Plaintiffs’ Cross-Complaint 17 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 10. Plaintiffs breached conditions and covenants of the alleged contract, if any 19 such contract existed, and/or failed to execute documents necessary to carry out the 20 purpose and intent of the contract. As a result of Plaintiffs’ breach, Plaintiffs’ recovery 21 should be barred or reduced thereby. 22 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 11. Plaintiffs are barred from any recovery against these answering Defendants 24 for any breach of contract claim because these answering Defendants complied with all the 25 terms of the alleged contract. 26 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 27 12. At all times herein relevant, these answering Defendants’ performance under 28 the alleged contract, if any contract existed at all, was excused. Answer to Complaint 3 1 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 13. These answering Defendants affirmatively alleges that they are entitled to a 3 set-off of all money they may become obligated to pay to Plaintiffs herein against any 4 money which Plaintiffs herein owe or may become obliged to pay to these answering 5 Defendants. 6 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 14. Plaintiffs’ claims against these answering Defendants are barred by the 8 statute of frauds. 9 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 15. Plaintiffs’ claims against these answering Defendants are barred by the 11 statutes of limitations set forth in Code of Civil Procedure §§337(1) and (3), 338(d), 339(1) 12 and (3), 340 (3) and (5). 13 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 16. At all times herein relevant, Defendants allege that each and every act done 15 or statement made by said Defendants, their officers, agents or employees, with reference 16 to some or all of the purported claims set forth in the Cross-Complaint herein, were made 17 reasonably and in good faith, and without any knowledge that said statements might be 18 false or inaccurate. 19 WHEREFORE, these answering Defendants pray for judgment as follows: 20 1. That Plaintiffs take nothing by their Cross-Complaint; 21 2. That Defendants be awarded their costs of suit and attorney’s fees; and 22 3. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper. 23 Dated: November 13, 2020 JGPC BUSINESS LAW PC 24 25 By: _____________________________ STEVE R. SHERMAN 26 Attorneys for Defendants and Cross- Complainants TED P. RUTKOWSKY and SUSAN 27 J. RUTKOWSKY 28 Answer to Complaint 4 1 PROOF OF SERVICE (Code of Civil Procedure §1013a) 2 I, the undersigned, declare that I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State 3 of California employed in the County of Alameda, State of California. I am over eighteen (18) years of age and not a party to the above-entitled action. My business address is 5890 Stoneridge Drive, 4 Suite 102, Pleasanton, CA 94588. On November 13, 2020, I served the following document(s) in the manner indicated below: 5 6 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 7 ( ) U.S. Mail: I am readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing and, after placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope, 8 with First class postage thereon fully prepaid and addressed as set forth below, I left it at a place where, in the ordinary course of business, the mail is picked up for delivery, or, alternatively, by 9 depositing same with the U.S. Postal Service, at Pleasanton, CA. (CCP §1013(a)) 10 ( ) Via Messenger: By causing personal delivery via messenger of the document(s) listed above to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth below. 11 ( ) Personal Delivery: By personally delivering the document(s) listed above to the person(s) 12 at the address(es) noted below. (CCP §1011) 13 ( ) Overnight Delivery: By placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope and marked for next-day delivery by United Parcel Service Next Day Air (delivery method). (CCP 14 §1013(c)) 15 (XX) Via Electronic Transmission: By causing delivery via email transmission of the document(s) listed above to the person(s) at the email address(es) set forth below. (CCP §1013(e)) 16 17 Justin Vecchiarelli, Esq. Proper Defense Law Corporation 18 677 W. Palmdon Drive, Suite 201 Fresno, CA 93704 19 justin@properdefenselaw.com 20 cc: linda@properdefenselaw.com 21 22 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Executed on November 13, 2020, at Pleasanton, California. 23 24 Kristina Hudelson 25 Kristina Hudelson 26 27 28 Certificate of Mailing per CCP §1013