Preview
1 KARA HITCHCOCK, ESQ. (SBN 208719)
PHILIP M. ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES
2 Employees of the Law Department
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
3 4450 Rosewood Drive, Suite 450
Pleasanton, CA 94588
4 Telephone: (925) 225-6838
Facsimile: (855) 732-9437 5/27/2021
5 Email: kara.hitchcock@statefarm.com
6 Attorneys for Defendant
Maureen Lynn Davis
7
8
9 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO / UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
11
12 VICTORIA ANNE MORAWIETZ, NO. 21-CIV-02153
13 Plaintiff, ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
14 v. Assigned for all purposes to Hon.
Robert Foiles
15 MAUREEN LYNN DAVIS, AND Dept. 21
DOES ONE THROUGH FIFTY,
16 INCLUSIVE,
17 Defendants.
18
Defendant, MAUREEN LYNN DAVIS, in answer to the Unverified Complaint filed
19
by plaintiff, VICTORIA ANNE MORAWIETZ, herein admits, denies and alleges as
20
follows:
21
Under the provisions of Section 431.30 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the
22
State of California, this answering defendant denies, generally and specifically, all and
23
singular, each and every allegation contained in the Unverified Complaint of plaintiff
24
herein, and the whole thereof, and specifically denies that plaintiff has been injured or
25
damaged as alleged herein, or in any other sum or manner, or otherwise or at all.
26
1. AS A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each
27
alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff was
28
-1-
Answer to Complaint
1 careless and negligent in and about the matters referred to in said Complaint, and that
2 said carelessness and negligence on plaintiff's own part proximately contributed to the
3 happening of the incident in question, and to the injuries, loss, and damages
4 complained of, if any there were.
5 2. AS A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each
6 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that the injuries and
7 damages complained of by plaintiff, if there were any, were either wholly or in part
8 directly and proximately caused by the negligence of persons or entities other than this
9 answering defendant, and said negligence comparatively reduces the proportion of
10 negligence and corresponding liability of this answering defendant.
11 3. AS A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each
12 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that said Complaint
13 fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering
14 defendant or at all.
15 4. AS A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each
16 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that the injuries, loss
17 and damages complained of, if any there were, were increased by the failure of plaintiff
18 to use reasonable diligence to mitigate them.
19 5. AS A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each alleged
20 Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that if liability is assessed
21 against her, pursuant to Civil Code Section 1431 et seq., this answering defendant shall
22 be liable only for the amount of non-economic damages allocated to her in direct
23 proportion to the percentage of fault assessed against her by the trier of fact and
24 requests that a separate judgment be rendered against her for that amount.
25 6. AS A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each
26 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that the Complaint
27 and each Cause of Action alleged therein is barred by California Code of Civil
28 Procedure §335.1 and/or the applicable statute of limitations, including, but not limited
-2-
Answer to Complaint
1 to, California Code of Civil Procedure §§337, 337.1, 337.15, 338, 339, 340.3 and 343.
2 7. AS A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each
3 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff knew, or
4 in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, of the risk and hazards involved
5 in the undertaking in which she engaged, but nevertheless and with full knowledge of
6 these things did fully and voluntarily consent to assume the risk and hazards involved in
7 this undertaking, thereby assuming all risks of any injuries and damages, if any, referred
8 to in the Complaint.
9 8. AS AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each
10 alleged Cause of Action, this answering defendant is informed and believes that at all
11 times mentioned herein plaintiff was in the course and scope of her employment and
12 that plaintiff's exclusive remedy lies within the workers’ compensation laws; or, in the
13 alternative, the injuries sustained by plaintiff, if any, were caused or contributed to by
14 the carelessness, negligence or other fault of plaintiff's employer and/or said employer’s
15 agents, servants or employees and that from any award made to plaintiff this defendant
16 is entitled to a credit, set-off or reduction in damages in an amount in direct proportion to
17 said employer’s and/or said employer’s agents’, servants’ or employees’ percentage of
18 fault pursuant to the rule of Witt v. Jackson.
19 WHEREFORE, this answering defendant prays that plaintiff takes nothing by
20 reason of her Complaint, that this answering defendant has judgment for her costs of
21 suit incurred herein, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper.
22
23 Dated: May 27, 2021 PHILIP M. ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES
24
Kara Hitchcock
25 Attorneys for Defendant
26 MAUREEN LYNN DAVIS
27
Electronic signature pursuant to Civil Code §1633.7(d).
28
-3-
Answer to Complaint
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2
Morawietz v. Davis
3 San Mateo County Superior Court - Redwood City Case No. 21-CIV-02153
4 I, the undersigned, declare that I am a resident of the United States; employed in the
City of Pleasanton and County of Alameda, State of California; over the age of 18
5 years; not a party to the within entitled cause; and my business address is 4450
6 Rosewood Drive, Suite 450, Pleasanton, CA 94588.
7 On May 27, 2021, I served the within document(s),
8 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
9
10
on the interested parties in this action as follows:
11
Attorney(s) for Plaintiff Victoria Anne
12 Morawietz
Jacob Shapiro
13 Shapiro Legal Group
851 Burlway Road, Suite 500
14
Burlingame, CA 94010
15 Fax: (650) 274-0182
js@shapiroinjuryattorney.com
16
17 [ x ] ONLY BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION. Only by e-mailing the
document(s) to the persons at the e-mail address(es) listed based on
18
notice provided that, during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, this
19 office will be working remotely, not able to send physical mail as usual,
and is therefore using only electronic mail.
20
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
21 the above is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on May 27, 2021,
22 at Pleasanton, California.
23
24
25 Karmen Seto
26
27
28 -4-
____________________________________________
Proof of Service
Preview
1 KARA HITCHCOCK, ESQ. (SBN 208719) PHILIP M. ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES 2 Employees of the Law Department State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company 3 4450 Rosewood Drive, Suite 450 Pleasanton, CA 94588 4 Telephone: (925) 225-6838 Facsimile: (855) 732-9437 5/27/2021 5 Email: kara.hitchcock@statefarm.com 6 Attorneys for Defendant Maureen Lynn Davis 7 8 9 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO / UNLIMITED JURISDICTION 11 12 VICTORIA ANNE MORAWIETZ, NO. 21-CIV-02153 13 Plaintiff, ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 14 v. Assigned for all purposes to Hon. Robert Foiles 15 MAUREEN LYNN DAVIS, AND Dept. 21 DOES ONE THROUGH FIFTY, 16 INCLUSIVE, 17 Defendants. 18 Defendant, MAUREEN LYNN DAVIS, in answer to the Unverified Complaint filed 19 by plaintiff, VICTORIA ANNE MORAWIETZ, herein admits, denies and alleges as 20 follows: 21 Under the provisions of Section 431.30 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the 22 State of California, this answering defendant denies, generally and specifically, all and 23 singular, each and every allegation contained in the Unverified Complaint of plaintiff 24 herein, and the whole thereof, and specifically denies that plaintiff has been injured or 25 damaged as alleged herein, or in any other sum or manner, or otherwise or at all. 26 1. AS A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each 27 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff was 28 -1- Answer to Complaint 1 careless and negligent in and about the matters referred to in said Complaint, and that 2 said carelessness and negligence on plaintiff's own part proximately contributed to the 3 happening of the incident in question, and to the injuries, loss, and damages 4 complained of, if any there were. 5 2. AS A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each 6 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that the injuries and 7 damages complained of by plaintiff, if there were any, were either wholly or in part 8 directly and proximately caused by the negligence of persons or entities other than this 9 answering defendant, and said negligence comparatively reduces the proportion of 10 negligence and corresponding liability of this answering defendant. 11 3. AS A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each 12 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that said Complaint 13 fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering 14 defendant or at all. 15 4. AS A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each 16 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that the injuries, loss 17 and damages complained of, if any there were, were increased by the failure of plaintiff 18 to use reasonable diligence to mitigate them. 19 5. AS A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each alleged 20 Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that if liability is assessed 21 against her, pursuant to Civil Code Section 1431 et seq., this answering defendant shall 22 be liable only for the amount of non-economic damages allocated to her in direct 23 proportion to the percentage of fault assessed against her by the trier of fact and 24 requests that a separate judgment be rendered against her for that amount. 25 6. AS A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each 26 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that the Complaint 27 and each Cause of Action alleged therein is barred by California Code of Civil 28 Procedure §335.1 and/or the applicable statute of limitations, including, but not limited -2- Answer to Complaint 1 to, California Code of Civil Procedure §§337, 337.1, 337.15, 338, 339, 340.3 and 343. 2 7. AS A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each 3 alleged Cause of Action thereof, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff knew, or 4 in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, of the risk and hazards involved 5 in the undertaking in which she engaged, but nevertheless and with full knowledge of 6 these things did fully and voluntarily consent to assume the risk and hazards involved in 7 this undertaking, thereby assuming all risks of any injuries and damages, if any, referred 8 to in the Complaint. 9 8. AS AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each 10 alleged Cause of Action, this answering defendant is informed and believes that at all 11 times mentioned herein plaintiff was in the course and scope of her employment and 12 that plaintiff's exclusive remedy lies within the workers’ compensation laws; or, in the 13 alternative, the injuries sustained by plaintiff, if any, were caused or contributed to by 14 the carelessness, negligence or other fault of plaintiff's employer and/or said employer’s 15 agents, servants or employees and that from any award made to plaintiff this defendant 16 is entitled to a credit, set-off or reduction in damages in an amount in direct proportion to 17 said employer’s and/or said employer’s agents’, servants’ or employees’ percentage of 18 fault pursuant to the rule of Witt v. Jackson. 19 WHEREFORE, this answering defendant prays that plaintiff takes nothing by 20 reason of her Complaint, that this answering defendant has judgment for her costs of 21 suit incurred herein, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper. 22 23 Dated: May 27, 2021 PHILIP M. ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES 24 Kara Hitchcock 25 Attorneys for Defendant 26 MAUREEN LYNN DAVIS 27 Electronic signature pursuant to Civil Code §1633.7(d). 28 -3- Answer to Complaint 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 Morawietz v. Davis 3 San Mateo County Superior Court - Redwood City Case No. 21-CIV-02153 4 I, the undersigned, declare that I am a resident of the United States; employed in the City of Pleasanton and County of Alameda, State of California; over the age of 18 5 years; not a party to the within entitled cause; and my business address is 4450 6 Rosewood Drive, Suite 450, Pleasanton, CA 94588. 7 On May 27, 2021, I served the within document(s), 8 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 9 10 on the interested parties in this action as follows: 11 Attorney(s) for Plaintiff Victoria Anne 12 Morawietz Jacob Shapiro 13 Shapiro Legal Group 851 Burlway Road, Suite 500 14 Burlingame, CA 94010 15 Fax: (650) 274-0182 js@shapiroinjuryattorney.com 16 17 [ x ] ONLY BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION. Only by e-mailing the document(s) to the persons at the e-mail address(es) listed based on 18 notice provided that, during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, this 19 office will be working remotely, not able to send physical mail as usual, and is therefore using only electronic mail. 20 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that 21 the above is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on May 27, 2021, 22 at Pleasanton, California. 23 24 25 Karmen Seto 26 27 28 -4- ____________________________________________ Proof of Service