Preview
Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 09/02/2020 03:12 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by R. Yanez,Deputy Clerk
1 Benjamin R. Trachtman, Esq. [SBN 137458]
Kevin L. Henderson, Esq. [SBN 150434]
2 TRACHTMAN & TRACHTMAN, LLP
19732 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 100
3 Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 282-0100
4 Facsimile: (949) 282-0111
5 Attorneys for Defendant TARGET CORPORATION
6
7
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
10
11
ERICA WYATT, an individual, CASE NO.: 20STCV28597
12 [Assigned for All Purposes to
Plaintiff, Hon. Thomas D. Long, Department 31]
13
vs. TARGET CORPORATION’S
14 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
15 TARGET CORPORATION, et al.,
COMPLAINT FILED: 07/29/20
16 TRIAL DATE: 01/26/22
Defendants.
17
18
19 Defendant, TARGET CORPORATION (hereinafter “this Answering
20 Defendant”), answers Plaintiff, ERICA WYATT’s (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) Complaint filed
21 on July 29, 2020, for itself alone and for no other defendant, admits, denies and
22 alleges as follows:
23 GENERAL DENIAL
24 1. This Answering Defendant denies each and every allegation of the
25 unverified Complaint, pursuant to the provisions of Section 431.30 of the Code of Civil
26 Procedure, and specifically denies that this Answering Defendant is in any way
27 responsible in any respect for the damages that Plaintiff has sustained or will sustain
28 as alleged in her Complaint and further denies that Plaintiff is now or will be entitled to
-1-
___________________________________________________________
DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 damages as a result of the matters alleged in the Complaint filed in this action.
2 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
3 (Failure to State Sufficient Facts)
4 2. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
5 that the Complaint fails to state facts certain and/or sufficient to constitute a cause of
6 action against this Answering Defendant.
7 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
8 (Standard of Care)
9 3. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
10 that Plaintiff is barred and precluded from any recovery in this action because this
11 Answering Defendant at all times complied with the applicable standard of care
12 required of this Answering Defendant, at the time and location where the subject
13 incident occurred.
14 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 (Contributory/Comparative Negligence)
16 4. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
17 that Plaintiff’s alleged damages, if any, were wholly or partly contributed to or
18 proximately caused by Plaintiff’s conduct and activities, including Plaintiff’s negligence
19 and carelessness. This Answering Defendant is entitled to an equitable apportionment
20 of the damages in relation to Plaintiff’s negligence or wrongdoing.
21 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
22 (Comparative Fault of Others)
23 5. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
24 that the matters complained of in the Complaint were caused, in whole or in part, by the
25 acts or omissions of third parties other than this Answering Defendant, and that any
26 liability found against this Answering Defendant must be reduced by the percentage of
27 fault found to apply to said third parties, including but not limited to Plaintiff.
28 ///
-2-
___________________________________________________________
DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (Intervening and Superseding Causes)
3 6. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
4 that if Plaintiff was injured or suffered any loss, which this Answering Defendant denies,
5 any such injury and/or loss was the proximate result of the intervening and superseding
6 actions on the part of Plaintiff or parties other than this Answering Defendant; and that,
7 by virtue of the intervening and superseding actions, any recovery against this
8 Answering Defendant must be reduced in percentage to the amount of fault attributable
9 to said intervening and superseding actions.
10 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
11 (Assumption of the Risk)
12 7. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
13 that Plaintiff expressly, voluntarily and knowingly assumed all risks about which she
14 complains in the Complaint, and is therefore barred, either totally or to the extent of
15 said assumption, from recovery of any damages.
16 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
17 (Estoppel)
18 8. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
19 that Plaintiff, by her own conduct, is equitably estopped from asserting any right to
20 recovery as against this Answering Defendant.
21 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
22 (Statute of Limitations)
23 9. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
24 that the Complaint, and each and every purported cause of action contained therein, is
25 barred, either wholly or in part, by the statute of limitations as set forth in the Code of
26 Civil Procedure including, but not limited to Sections 335.1.
27 ///
28 ///
-3-
___________________________________________________________
DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (Failure to Mitigate Damages)
3 10. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
4 that if Plaintiff suffered a loss or damage, which this Answering Defendant denies, then
5 Plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable care and diligence to avoid that loss, if any, or
6 minimize the resulting damages, if any, and cannot recover for said loss or damage
7 beyond that which would have resulted notwithstanding a reasonable mitigation.
8 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
9 (Waiver)
10 11. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
11 that Plaintiff has engaged in conduct and activities sufficient to constitute a waiver of
12 any alleged breach of contract, negligence, or any other conduct, if any, as set forth in
13 the Complaint.
14 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 (Laches)
16 12. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
17 that each and every one of Plaintiff’s causes of action is barred by the doctrine of
18 laches.
19 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
20 (Consent)
21 13. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
22 that the conduct of this Answering Defendant was with Plaintiff’s consent, which bars
23 the Complaint.
24 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
25 (Estoppel)
26 14. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
27 that the Complaint, and each and every cause of action alleged therein, is barred by
28 the doctrine of estoppel.
-4-
___________________________________________________________
DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (Civil Code Section 1431, et seq.)
3 15. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
4 that the matters complained of in Plaintiff’s Complaint were legally and/or proximately
5 caused and contributed to by the fault of a third party or parties, whether or not such
6 individuals, entities, or other forms of business associations have been brought into the
7 present action, including but not limited to Plaintiff. The non-economic damages of
8 which Plaintiff complains, if any, shall be allocated to this Answering Defendant only in
9 direct proportion to this Answering Defendant’s percentage of fault, if any, pursuant to
10 the provisions of Civil Code Section 1431, et seq., and a separate judgment shall be
11 rendered against this Answering Defendant for that amount only.
12 SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
13 (Unclean Hands)
14 16. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
15 that the injuries, if any, and damages, if any, sustained were the result of the misuse of
16 the premises and/or unauthorized entry onto the premises in question.
17 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
18 (Open and Obvious)
19 17. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
20 that the allegedly dangerous condition complained of by Plaintiff was an open and
21 obvious condition.
22 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
23 (Witt v. Jackson)
24 18. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
25 that at all times material herein, Plaintiff Erica Wyatt was in the course and scope of
26 her employment and that Plaintiff Erica Wyatt and her employer were subject to the
27 provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of California; that certain
28 sums have been paid to or on behalf of Plaintiff Erica Wyatt herein under the applicable
-5-
___________________________________________________________
DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California; that Plaintiff Erica Wyatt's
2 employer and Plaintiff Erica Wyatt's co-employees were negligent and careless and
3 that such negligence and carelessness proximately contributed to and caused the
4 injuries of Plaintiff Erica Wyatt, if any; and that under the doctrine of Witt v. Jackson
5 such negligence and carelessness should reduce or eliminate any lien claim or claim in
6 a Complaint-In-Intervention which may be made for reimbursement of Workers’
7 Compensation benefits paid to or on behalf of Plaintiff Erica Wyatt.
8 NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
9 (Lack of Notice)
10 19. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
11 that this Answering Defendant did not know, and could not have known through the
12 exercise of reasonable care, of any facts alleged in the Complaint.
13 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
14 (Reservation)
15 20. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges,
16 that this Answering Defendant presently has insufficient knowledge or information upon
17 which to form a belief as to whether it may have additional, as yet unstated affirmative
18 defenses available. This Answering Defendant reserves herein the right to assert
19 additional defenses in the event that the discovery indicates that they would be
20 appropriate.
21 WHEREFORE, this Answering Defendant prays for judgment as follows:
22 1. That Plaintiff take nothing by her Complaint;
23 ///
24 ///
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
-6-
___________________________________________________________
DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 2. That Defendant be awarded its costs of suit, including expert and
2 attorneys' fees, incurred herein; and
3 3. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
4
5 DATED: September 2, 2020 TRACHTMAN & TRACHTMAN, LLP
6
7
8
By:_____________________________
9 Benjamin R. Trachtman
Kevin L. Henderson
10 Attorneys for Defendant TARGET
CORPORATION
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-7-
___________________________________________________________
DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
Wyatt vs. Target Corporation, et al; Case No. 20STCV28597
2
3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.
4 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
5 I, Leah Letenyei, declare:
6 I am a citizen of the United States and employed in Irvine, California. I am over
7 the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business
address is 19732 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92612.
8
On September 2, 2020, I served a copy of the within document(s):
9
TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
10
11 [X ] by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with
postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Irvine,
12 California addressed as set forth below.
13 John A. Montevideo, Esq.
Michael K. Teiman, Esq.
14
DIMARCO| ARAUJO | MONTEVIDEO
15 1324 North Broadway
Santa Ana, California 92706
16 T: (714) 835-6990 | F: (714) 568-1854
17 Attorneys for Plaintiff Erica Wyatt
18 I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing
correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S.
19 Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary
20 course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed
invalid if the postal cancellation date or the postage meter date is more than one day
21 after date of deposit for mailing identified in this affidavit.
22 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
23 the above is true and correct.
24 Executed on September 2, 2020, at Irvine, California.
/s/ Leah Letenyei
25
____________________________________
26 Leah Letenyei, Declarant
27
28
-8-
___________________________________________________________
DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
Preview
Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 09/02/2020 03:12 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by R. Yanez,Deputy Clerk 1 Benjamin R. Trachtman, Esq. [SBN 137458] Kevin L. Henderson, Esq. [SBN 150434] 2 TRACHTMAN & TRACHTMAN, LLP 19732 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 100 3 Irvine, CA 92612 Telephone: (949) 282-0100 4 Facsimile: (949) 282-0111 5 Attorneys for Defendant TARGET CORPORATION 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 10 11 ERICA WYATT, an individual, CASE NO.: 20STCV28597 12 [Assigned for All Purposes to Plaintiff, Hon. Thomas D. Long, Department 31] 13 vs. TARGET CORPORATION’S 14 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 15 TARGET CORPORATION, et al., COMPLAINT FILED: 07/29/20 16 TRIAL DATE: 01/26/22 Defendants. 17 18 19 Defendant, TARGET CORPORATION (hereinafter “this Answering 20 Defendant”), answers Plaintiff, ERICA WYATT’s (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) Complaint filed 21 on July 29, 2020, for itself alone and for no other defendant, admits, denies and 22 alleges as follows: 23 GENERAL DENIAL 24 1. This Answering Defendant denies each and every allegation of the 25 unverified Complaint, pursuant to the provisions of Section 431.30 of the Code of Civil 26 Procedure, and specifically denies that this Answering Defendant is in any way 27 responsible in any respect for the damages that Plaintiff has sustained or will sustain 28 as alleged in her Complaint and further denies that Plaintiff is now or will be entitled to -1- ___________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 damages as a result of the matters alleged in the Complaint filed in this action. 2 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 3 (Failure to State Sufficient Facts) 4 2. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 5 that the Complaint fails to state facts certain and/or sufficient to constitute a cause of 6 action against this Answering Defendant. 7 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 8 (Standard of Care) 9 3. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 10 that Plaintiff is barred and precluded from any recovery in this action because this 11 Answering Defendant at all times complied with the applicable standard of care 12 required of this Answering Defendant, at the time and location where the subject 13 incident occurred. 14 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 (Contributory/Comparative Negligence) 16 4. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 17 that Plaintiff’s alleged damages, if any, were wholly or partly contributed to or 18 proximately caused by Plaintiff’s conduct and activities, including Plaintiff’s negligence 19 and carelessness. This Answering Defendant is entitled to an equitable apportionment 20 of the damages in relation to Plaintiff’s negligence or wrongdoing. 21 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 (Comparative Fault of Others) 23 5. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 24 that the matters complained of in the Complaint were caused, in whole or in part, by the 25 acts or omissions of third parties other than this Answering Defendant, and that any 26 liability found against this Answering Defendant must be reduced by the percentage of 27 fault found to apply to said third parties, including but not limited to Plaintiff. 28 /// -2- ___________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Intervening and Superseding Causes) 3 6. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 4 that if Plaintiff was injured or suffered any loss, which this Answering Defendant denies, 5 any such injury and/or loss was the proximate result of the intervening and superseding 6 actions on the part of Plaintiff or parties other than this Answering Defendant; and that, 7 by virtue of the intervening and superseding actions, any recovery against this 8 Answering Defendant must be reduced in percentage to the amount of fault attributable 9 to said intervening and superseding actions. 10 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 11 (Assumption of the Risk) 12 7. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 13 that Plaintiff expressly, voluntarily and knowingly assumed all risks about which she 14 complains in the Complaint, and is therefore barred, either totally or to the extent of 15 said assumption, from recovery of any damages. 16 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 (Estoppel) 18 8. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 19 that Plaintiff, by her own conduct, is equitably estopped from asserting any right to 20 recovery as against this Answering Defendant. 21 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22 (Statute of Limitations) 23 9. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 24 that the Complaint, and each and every purported cause of action contained therein, is 25 barred, either wholly or in part, by the statute of limitations as set forth in the Code of 26 Civil Procedure including, but not limited to Sections 335.1. 27 /// 28 /// -3- ___________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Failure to Mitigate Damages) 3 10. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 4 that if Plaintiff suffered a loss or damage, which this Answering Defendant denies, then 5 Plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable care and diligence to avoid that loss, if any, or 6 minimize the resulting damages, if any, and cannot recover for said loss or damage 7 beyond that which would have resulted notwithstanding a reasonable mitigation. 8 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 (Waiver) 10 11. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 11 that Plaintiff has engaged in conduct and activities sufficient to constitute a waiver of 12 any alleged breach of contract, negligence, or any other conduct, if any, as set forth in 13 the Complaint. 14 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 (Laches) 16 12. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 17 that each and every one of Plaintiff’s causes of action is barred by the doctrine of 18 laches. 19 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 20 (Consent) 21 13. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 22 that the conduct of this Answering Defendant was with Plaintiff’s consent, which bars 23 the Complaint. 24 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 25 (Estoppel) 26 14. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 27 that the Complaint, and each and every cause of action alleged therein, is barred by 28 the doctrine of estoppel. -4- ___________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Civil Code Section 1431, et seq.) 3 15. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 4 that the matters complained of in Plaintiff’s Complaint were legally and/or proximately 5 caused and contributed to by the fault of a third party or parties, whether or not such 6 individuals, entities, or other forms of business associations have been brought into the 7 present action, including but not limited to Plaintiff. The non-economic damages of 8 which Plaintiff complains, if any, shall be allocated to this Answering Defendant only in 9 direct proportion to this Answering Defendant’s percentage of fault, if any, pursuant to 10 the provisions of Civil Code Section 1431, et seq., and a separate judgment shall be 11 rendered against this Answering Defendant for that amount only. 12 SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13 (Unclean Hands) 14 16. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 15 that the injuries, if any, and damages, if any, sustained were the result of the misuse of 16 the premises and/or unauthorized entry onto the premises in question. 17 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 (Open and Obvious) 19 17. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 20 that the allegedly dangerous condition complained of by Plaintiff was an open and 21 obvious condition. 22 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23 (Witt v. Jackson) 24 18. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 25 that at all times material herein, Plaintiff Erica Wyatt was in the course and scope of 26 her employment and that Plaintiff Erica Wyatt and her employer were subject to the 27 provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of California; that certain 28 sums have been paid to or on behalf of Plaintiff Erica Wyatt herein under the applicable -5- ___________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California; that Plaintiff Erica Wyatt's 2 employer and Plaintiff Erica Wyatt's co-employees were negligent and careless and 3 that such negligence and carelessness proximately contributed to and caused the 4 injuries of Plaintiff Erica Wyatt, if any; and that under the doctrine of Witt v. Jackson 5 such negligence and carelessness should reduce or eliminate any lien claim or claim in 6 a Complaint-In-Intervention which may be made for reimbursement of Workers’ 7 Compensation benefits paid to or on behalf of Plaintiff Erica Wyatt. 8 NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 (Lack of Notice) 10 19. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 11 that this Answering Defendant did not know, and could not have known through the 12 exercise of reasonable care, of any facts alleged in the Complaint. 13 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 (Reservation) 15 20. This Answering Defendant is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, 16 that this Answering Defendant presently has insufficient knowledge or information upon 17 which to form a belief as to whether it may have additional, as yet unstated affirmative 18 defenses available. This Answering Defendant reserves herein the right to assert 19 additional defenses in the event that the discovery indicates that they would be 20 appropriate. 21 WHEREFORE, this Answering Defendant prays for judgment as follows: 22 1. That Plaintiff take nothing by her Complaint; 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// -6- ___________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 2. That Defendant be awarded its costs of suit, including expert and 2 attorneys' fees, incurred herein; and 3 3. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 4 5 DATED: September 2, 2020 TRACHTMAN & TRACHTMAN, LLP 6 7 8 By:_____________________________ 9 Benjamin R. Trachtman Kevin L. Henderson 10 Attorneys for Defendant TARGET CORPORATION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -7- ___________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 PROOF OF SERVICE Wyatt vs. Target Corporation, et al; Case No. 20STCV28597 2 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. 4 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) 5 I, Leah Letenyei, declare: 6 I am a citizen of the United States and employed in Irvine, California. I am over 7 the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business address is 19732 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 100, Irvine, CA 92612. 8 On September 2, 2020, I served a copy of the within document(s): 9 TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 10 11 [X ] by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Irvine, 12 California addressed as set forth below. 13 John A. Montevideo, Esq. Michael K. Teiman, Esq. 14 DIMARCO| ARAUJO | MONTEVIDEO 15 1324 North Broadway Santa Ana, California 92706 16 T: (714) 835-6990 | F: (714) 568-1854 17 Attorneys for Plaintiff Erica Wyatt 18 I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S. 19 Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary 20 course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or the postage meter date is more than one day 21 after date of deposit for mailing identified in this affidavit. 22 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that 23 the above is true and correct. 24 Executed on September 2, 2020, at Irvine, California. /s/ Leah Letenyei 25 ____________________________________ 26 Leah Letenyei, Declarant 27 28 -8- ___________________________________________________________ DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT