Preview
Garrett May, SBN 275909 E-FILED
Robert May, SBN 250968 3/10/2021 9:59 AM
Ryan Buchanan, SBN 300804 Superior Court of California
The May Firm, Inc. County of Fresno
297 Santa Rosa Street By: A. Rodriguez, Deputy
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Phone: (805) 980 7758
Fax: (760) 980 7754
Email: litgwmayfinnxom
Attorneysfor Plainlg'lfStepIzam'e Canales
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF FRESNO — B.F. SISK COURTHOUSE
STEPHANIE CANALES, an individual; CASE NO. 21CECG00692
Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES;
vs. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
ORTEGA’S MEAT DISTRIBUTION, INC., a l. Negligence
California corporation; JOSE VIVANCO 2. Negligence Per Se
GONZALEZ, an individual; and DOES 1
through 50, Inclusive,
Defendants.
Plaintiff STEPHANIE CANALES (“Plaintiff") alleges as follows:
THE PARTIES
2| 1. Plaintiff STEPHANIE CANALES is an individual currently residing in Fresno,
22 California.
23 2. Defendant ORTEGA’S MEAT DISTRIBUTION, INC., a California
24 corporation, is now and at all times mentioned in this complaint was, a business entity
organized and existing under the laws of the State 0f California, with its principal place 0f
business located at 2316 South Fruit Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706.
3. Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ is an individual currently residing in
Reedley, California.
Complaint for Rnnages; Demand for Jury
Trial -l
4. Plaintiff is unaware of the names and capacities of Defendants Does 1 through
50 inclusive, and therefore sues them by fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint
to show the true names and capacities of these Defendants once they are ascertained. Plaintiff is
informed, believes and thereon alleges that each of these Defendants are responsible in some
manner for the wrongful acts alleged in this Complaint and proximately caused Plaintiff’s
damages.
EM
5. Pursuant to the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure §395, venue is
proper in this judicial district because the subject motor vehicle collision occurred in
10 unincorporated area in the County of Fresno, State of California.
ll GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
12 6. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the paragraphs above, as though fully set
l3 forth herein.
14 7. At all times herein mentioned, “Defendants” refers to ORTEGA’S MEAT
15 DISTRIBUTION, INC., JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ, and DOES 1 through 50.
l6 8. At all times herein mentioned, the subject motor vehicle collision occurred on
l7 Peach Ave, approximately sixty feet (6O fl) north of Belmont Ave in the County of Fresno,
l8 State of California.
l9 9. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants operated a certain vehicle owned by
20 Defendants.
2| 10. At all times herein mentioned Defendants entrusted a certain vehicle owned by
22 Defendants to Defendants.
23 11. At all times herein mentioned Defendants owed Plaintiff a duty of care and were
24 required to conform their conduct to that of a reasonably prudent person.
25 12. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants operated their vehicle as an agent for,
26 and in the course and scope of their employment with Defendants.
27 ///
28 ///
Complaint for Damages; Demand for July Trial
-2
13. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants actions caused the injuries to Plaintiff
set forth below while in the course and scope of their employment with, and while acting as an
agent for Defendants. Therefore, Defendants are all fully responsible for Defendants conduct
through the doctrine of respondeat superior.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(NEGLIGENCE)
14. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the paragraphs above, as though fully set
forth herein.
15. On or about June 14, 201 9, Defendants operated their vehicle in such a negligent
manner as to cause Plaintiff’s vehicle to be violently struck by Defendants’ vehicle, causing
serious injuries to Plaintiff.
16. At said times and places, Defendants negligently, carelessly, and without due
care or regard for the life, safety, and rights of Plaintiff, did so own, entrust, maintain, operate,
and/or failed to maintain the vehicle driven by Defendants in a safe manner, causing Plaintiff’s
15 vehicle to be struck violently, causing sen'ous injuries to Plaintiff.
16 17. As a proximate result of the negligence of Defendants, and each of them,
17 Plaintiff was hurt and injured in his health, strength, and activity, sustaining injury to his body
and shock and injury to his nervous system and person, all of which said injuries have caused,
19 and continue to cause Plaintiff great mental, physical and emotional distress and pain and
20 suffering. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges, that said injuries will result in
21 some permanent disability t0 said Plaintiff, all to his general damages in an amount to be
22 proven at trial.
23 18. As a proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them,
24 Plaintiff has incurred and will continue to incur medical and related expenses, in an amount that
25 is unknown at this time but which will be proven at the time of trial.
26 19. As a proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them,
27 Plaintiff has sustained economic damages and loss of earnings, and will continue to incur
28 economic damages and loss of earnings in an amount that is unknown at this time but which
Complaint for Damages; Demand for Jury Trial
-3
will be proven at the time of trial.
20. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of
them, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer, a loss of earning capacity in an amount
presently unknown but which will be proven at the time of trial.
21. As a filrther proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of
them, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer general damages in an amount presently
unknown, but which will be proven at the time of trial.
22. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges, that in the future as a further
direct, proximate and legal result of the negligence, carelessness, and unlawfulness of
Defendants, Plaintiff will require the services of physicians, surgeons, therapists, nurses,
hospitals and other medical and chiropractic professional services to treat and care for him, and
the reasonable amount of said services and liability will conform to proof at the time of trial.
23. As a proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them,
Plaintiff has sustained economic damages and loss of earnings, and will continue to incur
economic damages and loss of earnings in an amount that is unknown at this time but which
will be proven at the time of trial.
24. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of
them, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer, a loss of earning capacity in an amount
presently unknown but which will be proven at the time of trial.
20 25. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of
21 them, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer general damages in an amount presently
22 unknown, but which will be proven at the time of trial.
23 26. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, Plaintiff’s
24 property was damaged, which caused Plaintiff to be without the use and enjoyment thereof.
25 Plaintiff’s property damages are an amount presently unknown, but which will be proven at the
26 time of trial.
27 ///
28 ///
Complaint for Damages; Demand for Jury Trial -4
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(NEGLIGENCE PER SE as to Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ)
27. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the paragraphs above, as though fully set
forth herein.
28. Plaintiff is further informed, believes and thereon alleges, that on or about June
14, 2019, Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ:
a. Violated Vehicle Code § 22350 in that Defendant JOSE VIVANCO
GONZALEZ operated Defendant’s vehicle at speeds unsafe for the conditions
(speeding); and
b. failed to use reasonable safety that a reasonable or prudent driver would have
which endangered the safety of persons and property; and
c. failed to otherwise control, operate and drive Defendant’s vehicle so as to avoid
causing said collision; and
d. Caused an impact between Defendants’ vehicle and Plaintiff’s vehicle.
29. California Vehicle Code § 22350, was intended and designed to prevent the
collisions, and injuries that Plaintiff suffered as alleged herein.
30. Plaintiff was a member of the class of persons for whose protection California
Vehicle Code § 22350 was adopted.
31. Plaintiff is further informed, believes and thereon alleges, that on or about June
20 14, 2019, Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ:
21 a. Violated Vehicle Code § 21703 in that Defendant JOSE VIVANCO
22 GONZALEZ, in operating Defendant’s vehicle, followed too closely to other
23 vehicles on the roadway (followed too closely); and
24 b. failed to use reasonable safety that a reasonable or prudent driver would have
25 which endangered the safety of persons and property; and
26 c. failed to otherwise control, operate and drive Defendant’s vehicle so as to avoid
27 causing said collision; and
28 d. Caused an impact between Defendants’ vehicle and Plaintiff’s vehicle.
Complaint for Damages; Demand for Jury Trial -5
32. California Vehicle Code § 21703, was intended and designed to prevent the
collisions, and injuries that Plaintiff suffered as alleged herein.
33. Plaintiff was a member of the class of persons for whose protection California
Vehicle Code § 21703 was adopted.
34. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that as a direct, proximate and
legal result of the negligence, carelessness, and unlawfulness of Defendant JOSE VIVANCO
GONZALEZ, Plaintiff was injured in his health, strength and activity, in various parts of his
person. Plaintiff also sustained shock and injury to his nervous system and person, all of which
injuries have caused and continue to cause Plaintiff severe mental, physical and nervous injury,
anxiety, and pain and suffering. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges, that these
injuries caused by Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ will result in some pennanent
disability to Plaintiff, all to his general damages, in an amount to be proven at trial.
35. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges, that as a further direct,
proximate and legal result of the negligence, carelessness, and unlawfulness of Defendant
JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff was required to, and did, employ physicians, nurses,
hospitals, therapists, and other medical and chiropractic professional services to treat and care
I7 for him. As a result, Plaintiff incurred and continues to incur expenses for medical and
[8 chiropractic treatment and care, medicines, and incidental care.
l9 36. As a proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant JOSE VIVANCO
20 GONZALEZ, Plaintiff has sustained economic damages and loss of earnings, and will continue
21 to incur economic damages and loss of earnings in an amount that is unknown at this time but
22 which will be proven at the time of trial.
23 37. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant JOSE
24 VIVANCO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer, a loss of eaming
25 capacity in an amount presently unknown but which will be proven at the time of trial.
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
Complaint for Damages; Demand for July Trial -6
38. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges, that in the future as a further
direct, proximate and legal result of the negligence, carelessness, and unlawfulness of
Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff will require the services of physicians,
surgeons, therapists, nurses, hospitals and other medical and chirOpractic’professional services
to treat and care for him, and the reasonable amount of said services and liability will conform
to proof at the time of trial.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against the Defendants, and each of them,
as follows:
l0 1. General damages to Plaintiff, according to proof;
ll 2 Medical and related expenses of Plaintiff, according to proof;
12 3 Loss of earnings of Plaintiff, according to proof;
l3 4. Loss of earning capacity of Plaintiff, according to proof;
l4 5 Damages to, and loss of use and enjoyment of, personal property, according to
proof;
6. Costs of suit herein;
7. Prejudgment interest;
8. Such other further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
20 JURY DEMAND
21 Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all claims so triable.
22
23 DATED: March 10, 2021 The May Fi
24
25
By
26 Garrett
Attorne laintiff
27
28
Complaint for Damages; Demand for Jury Trial -7
Preview
Garrett May, SBN 275909 E-FILED Robert May, SBN 250968 3/10/2021 9:59 AM Ryan Buchanan, SBN 300804 Superior Court of California The May Firm, Inc. County of Fresno 297 Santa Rosa Street By: A. Rodriguez, Deputy San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Phone: (805) 980 7758 Fax: (760) 980 7754 Email: litgwmayfinnxom Attorneysfor Plainlg'lfStepIzam'e Canales SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF FRESNO — B.F. SISK COURTHOUSE STEPHANIE CANALES, an individual; CASE NO. 21CECG00692 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; vs. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL ORTEGA’S MEAT DISTRIBUTION, INC., a l. Negligence California corporation; JOSE VIVANCO 2. Negligence Per Se GONZALEZ, an individual; and DOES 1 through 50, Inclusive, Defendants. Plaintiff STEPHANIE CANALES (“Plaintiff") alleges as follows: THE PARTIES 2| 1. Plaintiff STEPHANIE CANALES is an individual currently residing in Fresno, 22 California. 23 2. Defendant ORTEGA’S MEAT DISTRIBUTION, INC., a California 24 corporation, is now and at all times mentioned in this complaint was, a business entity organized and existing under the laws of the State 0f California, with its principal place 0f business located at 2316 South Fruit Avenue, Fresno, CA 93706. 3. Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ is an individual currently residing in Reedley, California. Complaint for Rnnages; Demand for Jury Trial -l 4. Plaintiff is unaware of the names and capacities of Defendants Does 1 through 50 inclusive, and therefore sues them by fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to show the true names and capacities of these Defendants once they are ascertained. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that each of these Defendants are responsible in some manner for the wrongful acts alleged in this Complaint and proximately caused Plaintiff’s damages. EM 5. Pursuant to the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure §395, venue is proper in this judicial district because the subject motor vehicle collision occurred in 10 unincorporated area in the County of Fresno, State of California. ll GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 12 6. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the paragraphs above, as though fully set l3 forth herein. 14 7. At all times herein mentioned, “Defendants” refers to ORTEGA’S MEAT 15 DISTRIBUTION, INC., JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ, and DOES 1 through 50. l6 8. At all times herein mentioned, the subject motor vehicle collision occurred on l7 Peach Ave, approximately sixty feet (6O fl) north of Belmont Ave in the County of Fresno, l8 State of California. l9 9. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants operated a certain vehicle owned by 20 Defendants. 2| 10. At all times herein mentioned Defendants entrusted a certain vehicle owned by 22 Defendants to Defendants. 23 11. At all times herein mentioned Defendants owed Plaintiff a duty of care and were 24 required to conform their conduct to that of a reasonably prudent person. 25 12. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants operated their vehicle as an agent for, 26 and in the course and scope of their employment with Defendants. 27 /// 28 /// Complaint for Damages; Demand for July Trial -2 13. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants actions caused the injuries to Plaintiff set forth below while in the course and scope of their employment with, and while acting as an agent for Defendants. Therefore, Defendants are all fully responsible for Defendants conduct through the doctrine of respondeat superior. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (NEGLIGENCE) 14. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the paragraphs above, as though fully set forth herein. 15. On or about June 14, 201 9, Defendants operated their vehicle in such a negligent manner as to cause Plaintiff’s vehicle to be violently struck by Defendants’ vehicle, causing serious injuries to Plaintiff. 16. At said times and places, Defendants negligently, carelessly, and without due care or regard for the life, safety, and rights of Plaintiff, did so own, entrust, maintain, operate, and/or failed to maintain the vehicle driven by Defendants in a safe manner, causing Plaintiff’s 15 vehicle to be struck violently, causing sen'ous injuries to Plaintiff. 16 17. As a proximate result of the negligence of Defendants, and each of them, 17 Plaintiff was hurt and injured in his health, strength, and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock and injury to his nervous system and person, all of which said injuries have caused, 19 and continue to cause Plaintiff great mental, physical and emotional distress and pain and 20 suffering. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges, that said injuries will result in 21 some permanent disability t0 said Plaintiff, all to his general damages in an amount to be 22 proven at trial. 23 18. As a proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them, 24 Plaintiff has incurred and will continue to incur medical and related expenses, in an amount that 25 is unknown at this time but which will be proven at the time of trial. 26 19. As a proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them, 27 Plaintiff has sustained economic damages and loss of earnings, and will continue to incur 28 economic damages and loss of earnings in an amount that is unknown at this time but which Complaint for Damages; Demand for Jury Trial -3 will be proven at the time of trial. 20. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer, a loss of earning capacity in an amount presently unknown but which will be proven at the time of trial. 21. As a filrther proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer general damages in an amount presently unknown, but which will be proven at the time of trial. 22. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges, that in the future as a further direct, proximate and legal result of the negligence, carelessness, and unlawfulness of Defendants, Plaintiff will require the services of physicians, surgeons, therapists, nurses, hospitals and other medical and chiropractic professional services to treat and care for him, and the reasonable amount of said services and liability will conform to proof at the time of trial. 23. As a proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff has sustained economic damages and loss of earnings, and will continue to incur economic damages and loss of earnings in an amount that is unknown at this time but which will be proven at the time of trial. 24. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer, a loss of earning capacity in an amount presently unknown but which will be proven at the time of trial. 20 25. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, and each of 21 them, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer general damages in an amount presently 22 unknown, but which will be proven at the time of trial. 23 26. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants, Plaintiff’s 24 property was damaged, which caused Plaintiff to be without the use and enjoyment thereof. 25 Plaintiff’s property damages are an amount presently unknown, but which will be proven at the 26 time of trial. 27 /// 28 /// Complaint for Damages; Demand for Jury Trial -4 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (NEGLIGENCE PER SE as to Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ) 27. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the paragraphs above, as though fully set forth herein. 28. Plaintiff is further informed, believes and thereon alleges, that on or about June 14, 2019, Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ: a. Violated Vehicle Code § 22350 in that Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ operated Defendant’s vehicle at speeds unsafe for the conditions (speeding); and b. failed to use reasonable safety that a reasonable or prudent driver would have which endangered the safety of persons and property; and c. failed to otherwise control, operate and drive Defendant’s vehicle so as to avoid causing said collision; and d. Caused an impact between Defendants’ vehicle and Plaintiff’s vehicle. 29. California Vehicle Code § 22350, was intended and designed to prevent the collisions, and injuries that Plaintiff suffered as alleged herein. 30. Plaintiff was a member of the class of persons for whose protection California Vehicle Code § 22350 was adopted. 31. Plaintiff is further informed, believes and thereon alleges, that on or about June 20 14, 2019, Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ: 21 a. Violated Vehicle Code § 21703 in that Defendant JOSE VIVANCO 22 GONZALEZ, in operating Defendant’s vehicle, followed too closely to other 23 vehicles on the roadway (followed too closely); and 24 b. failed to use reasonable safety that a reasonable or prudent driver would have 25 which endangered the safety of persons and property; and 26 c. failed to otherwise control, operate and drive Defendant’s vehicle so as to avoid 27 causing said collision; and 28 d. Caused an impact between Defendants’ vehicle and Plaintiff’s vehicle. Complaint for Damages; Demand for Jury Trial -5 32. California Vehicle Code § 21703, was intended and designed to prevent the collisions, and injuries that Plaintiff suffered as alleged herein. 33. Plaintiff was a member of the class of persons for whose protection California Vehicle Code § 21703 was adopted. 34. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges that as a direct, proximate and legal result of the negligence, carelessness, and unlawfulness of Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff was injured in his health, strength and activity, in various parts of his person. Plaintiff also sustained shock and injury to his nervous system and person, all of which injuries have caused and continue to cause Plaintiff severe mental, physical and nervous injury, anxiety, and pain and suffering. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges, that these injuries caused by Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ will result in some pennanent disability to Plaintiff, all to his general damages, in an amount to be proven at trial. 35. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges, that as a further direct, proximate and legal result of the negligence, carelessness, and unlawfulness of Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff was required to, and did, employ physicians, nurses, hospitals, therapists, and other medical and chiropractic professional services to treat and care I7 for him. As a result, Plaintiff incurred and continues to incur expenses for medical and [8 chiropractic treatment and care, medicines, and incidental care. l9 36. As a proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant JOSE VIVANCO 20 GONZALEZ, Plaintiff has sustained economic damages and loss of earnings, and will continue 21 to incur economic damages and loss of earnings in an amount that is unknown at this time but 22 which will be proven at the time of trial. 23 37. As a further proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant JOSE 24 VIVANCO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer, a loss of eaming 25 capacity in an amount presently unknown but which will be proven at the time of trial. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// Complaint for Damages; Demand for July Trial -6 38. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereon alleges, that in the future as a further direct, proximate and legal result of the negligence, carelessness, and unlawfulness of Defendant JOSE VIVANCO GONZALEZ, Plaintiff will require the services of physicians, surgeons, therapists, nurses, hospitals and other medical and chirOpractic’professional services to treat and care for him, and the reasonable amount of said services and liability will conform to proof at the time of trial. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against the Defendants, and each of them, as follows: l0 1. General damages to Plaintiff, according to proof; ll 2 Medical and related expenses of Plaintiff, according to proof; 12 3 Loss of earnings of Plaintiff, according to proof; l3 4. Loss of earning capacity of Plaintiff, according to proof; l4 5 Damages to, and loss of use and enjoyment of, personal property, according to proof; 6. Costs of suit herein; 7. Prejudgment interest; 8. Such other further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 20 JURY DEMAND 21 Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all claims so triable. 22 23 DATED: March 10, 2021 The May Fi 24 25 By 26 Garrett Attorne laintiff 27 28 Complaint for Damages; Demand for Jury Trial -7