Preview
(og 7 e mn
Vincent Galvin (#104448)
Neil M. Kliebenstein (#226060) : | \L E D
BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP F OUNTY
1741 Technology Drive, Suite 200 ALAMEDA ©
Nd
San Jose, CA 95110-1355 7 2003
WwW
Telephone: (408) 279-5393 NOV 0
Facsimile: (408) 279-5845 ec. Off iClerk
ARTHUR I 2 eiakedlde ——
BR
W
Attorneys for Defendants By —{j
ISUZU MOTORS AMERICA, INC., ISUZU
Dn
TRUCK USA, INC., and AMERICAN ISUZU
MOTORS, INC.
YN
Oo
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
0
FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
ANUM LALANI, a minor, by and through her ) CASE NO. RG03112070
Guardian ad Litem, SHOUKET (RICHARD) ) |
LALANI, ) | ANSWER OF ISUZU MOTORS AMERICA,
) INC., ISUZU TRUCK USA, INC., AND
Plaintiffs, ) AMERICAN ISUZU MOTORS, INC. TO
) PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT |
vs. )
)
ISUZU MOTORS AMERICA, INC., ISUZU)
TRUCK USA, INC., AMERICAN ISUZU) Action Filed: August 15, 2003
MOTORS, INC., ALAMO RENT-A-CAR, INC..,) Trial Date: None
KEN LIGON AND CHRISTINE PAVEL- LIGON,)
and Does | to 250, >)
)
Defendants. )
Defendants Isuzu Motors America, Inc. (““ISZA”), Isuzu Truck of America, Inc. (““ITAT’”)
(erroneously identified as Isuzu Truck USA, Inc.) and American Isuzu Motors, Inc. (““AIMI”) appear and
generally and specifically deny each allegation and cause of action contained in the complaint.
ISZA, ITAI and AIMI deny plaintiff sustained any damages due to any act or omission of
ISZA, ITAI, or AIMI.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1. The complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against
ISZA, ITAI, and AIMI.
Mill
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT ol
:ODMA\PCDOCS\SJON14957\1
2. Plaintiff was negligent in and about the matters and things stated in the complaint,
&
and that negligence directly and proximately caused the accident and plaintiff's injuries and damages, if
NY
any. Under the doctrine of Li v. Yellow Cab, plaintiffs contributory negligence reduces plaintiff's
WY
damages, if any.
BF
3. Plaintiff knowingly, voluntarily and of her own free will placed herself in an
WwW
unsafe and dangerous position, and therefore assumed all resulting risks.
DO
4. Plaintiff failed to use the product described in the complaint in the manner for
NN
which it was intended, and that misuse directly caused the accident and plaintiff's injuries and damages,
Cfo
if any.
0
5. The product referred to in the complaint was abused and/or altered in a manner
s
Rl
which was not reasonably foreseeable. That abuse and alteration directly caused the accident and
Ona
plaintiff's injuries and damages, if any.
RE
6. Any damages plaintiff claims were either wholly or partially caused by the
Re
negligence or other culpable conduct of persons or entities other than ISZA, ITAI, and AIMI, and such
RR
Dane
comparative fault reduces the percentage of fault of ISZA, ITAI and AIML, if any.
7. The liability of ISZA, ITAI and AIMI, if any, is several pursuant to California
Civil Code §§ 1430-1432, including but not limited to § 1431.2.
8. Plaintiffs claims against ISZA, ITAI and AIMI are preempted in whole or in part
ROR
BCOe
by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 USCS §1392(d), 1966, as amended, and
regulations promulgated under it.
9. Plaintiff caused or allowed the vehicle and/or other evidence to be concealed, lost,
®
NKR
altered, damaged, destroyed, or otherwise spoliated. |
BOK
ISZA, ITAI and AIMI pray:
KN
(1) That plaintiff take nothing by her complaint and that the complaint and the action
NY
RRR
be dismissed;
NH
(2) For its costs; and
NO
(3) For such other and further relief as the court deems proper.
NO
SN
MIL
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 2
sODMA\PCDOCS\SIONI14957\1
Dated: November Y 2003 BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP
iN i
WN
WW
* Vincent Galvin
FSF
Neil M. Kliebenstein
mn
Attorneys for Defendants —
Isuzu Motors America, Inc., Isuzu Truck USA, Inc.,
DD
and American Isuzu Motors, Inc.
wn
Co
Oo
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
sODMA\PCDOCS\SION 14957\1
. ie addressed
w asa follows:
11, "Attorneys for Plaintiff, Anum Lalani, a’a Attorneys for Alamo Rent-A-Car
| sminor, by. and through her Guardian ad’ me Alan Zacharin, Esq. :
+12 Litem, Shouket. (Richard) Lalani oe cnn ae Andrada & Schanzenbach. ~.:
> Michael B.-Moore, Esq. Panc8 180. Grand Avenue, Suite 900:
13]:~: Charles A: Browning, Esq. a ~ Oakland, ‘CA 94612
|Moore & Browning (510):287:4160 aoa
“1595 Market'Street, Suite 1320 Fax: 510) 2287- 4161 i
15 San Francisco, GA 94105 a |
(415) 956-6500 ~ mea Attorneys. for Ken Ligon ‘and.
16, : “Fax: (415) 956-6580 Christine: Pavel-Ligon: -*.
Timothy.F: Pearce, Esq.
17].° ‘Attorneys for Rubina Lalani Hersh &‘Hersh
|. Gary Moss, Esq: 7 205° 601°Van Ness Avenue #2080
18 3 || . Moss & Hough are San Francisco, CA- 94102 -
‘| 601 Van Ness Avenue #2030 7a See (415) 444). 5544 os en an ee
19 |, San Francisco, CA ; ‘94102 + py SE Sa Fax:(415) 4441. 7586 “ a oy -
*. 20 (415) 399-1110 ee wep Re Ln Be es OE
«|, Fax: (415) 399-1552 ce an OE a Es Wee
21°
_X_ VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL. I caused such envelope t.to ) be deposited in the mail at San
22 J ose, California; in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid thereof. Iam readily familiar...
‘|; with the firm!s business practice for collection and processing. of correspondence; for mailing, with.
23 the United States Postal Service. The. inail'iis deposited: with: ‘the U.S. Postal Service’ on'that same - : i
day i in the ordinary course of business: I ain aware that on “motion of the party served, sérvice. is” °
24 presumed invalid if the postal cancellation dated or postage. meter date isis more’ than’< ne day after ea
25 - the date of deposit for mailing an affidavit.
26].
labeled, and caused to be deposited into an. a n.cvernight delivery. (F ederal Express; United Paicel <
27 Service, ete. ») receptacle or delivered to. an authorized ¢courier or driver: authorized by. the’ express" -
“service carrier to receive documents; ‘in‘an envelope or a package designated by: the express . ae
28 . service carrier with delivery fees paid: or. provided for, addressed to the person ‘on whom it’ is to: arn
ODMAWPCDOCS)S,011 o4so2\1
' :
be ne
be served, at the office address as last given by that person on any document filed in the case and
served on that person; otherwise, at that person's place of residence.
VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION. The document was served on the above
party in this action by causing a true copy of said document to be transmitted by facsimile to the
number listed adjacent to the name on this Proof of Service. The transmission was reported as
complete and without error.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on November 4, 2003, at San
Jose, California.
r »
10 “Evangeline Sabado
il
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
| 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
::ODMA\PCDOCS\SJO\104802\1 3
Preview
(og 7 e mn Vincent Galvin (#104448) Neil M. Kliebenstein (#226060) : | \L E D BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP F OUNTY 1741 Technology Drive, Suite 200 ALAMEDA © Nd San Jose, CA 95110-1355 7 2003 WwW Telephone: (408) 279-5393 NOV 0 Facsimile: (408) 279-5845 ec. Off iClerk ARTHUR I 2 eiakedlde —— BR W Attorneys for Defendants By —{j ISUZU MOTORS AMERICA, INC., ISUZU Dn TRUCK USA, INC., and AMERICAN ISUZU MOTORS, INC. YN Oo SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 0 FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA ANUM LALANI, a minor, by and through her ) CASE NO. RG03112070 Guardian ad Litem, SHOUKET (RICHARD) ) | LALANI, ) | ANSWER OF ISUZU MOTORS AMERICA, ) INC., ISUZU TRUCK USA, INC., AND Plaintiffs, ) AMERICAN ISUZU MOTORS, INC. TO ) PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT | vs. ) ) ISUZU MOTORS AMERICA, INC., ISUZU) TRUCK USA, INC., AMERICAN ISUZU) Action Filed: August 15, 2003 MOTORS, INC., ALAMO RENT-A-CAR, INC..,) Trial Date: None KEN LIGON AND CHRISTINE PAVEL- LIGON,) and Does | to 250, >) ) Defendants. ) Defendants Isuzu Motors America, Inc. (““ISZA”), Isuzu Truck of America, Inc. (““ITAT’”) (erroneously identified as Isuzu Truck USA, Inc.) and American Isuzu Motors, Inc. (““AIMI”) appear and generally and specifically deny each allegation and cause of action contained in the complaint. ISZA, ITAI and AIMI deny plaintiff sustained any damages due to any act or omission of ISZA, ITAI, or AIMI. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. The complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against ISZA, ITAI, and AIMI. Mill ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT ol :ODMA\PCDOCS\SJON14957\1 2. Plaintiff was negligent in and about the matters and things stated in the complaint, & and that negligence directly and proximately caused the accident and plaintiff's injuries and damages, if NY any. Under the doctrine of Li v. Yellow Cab, plaintiffs contributory negligence reduces plaintiff's WY damages, if any. BF 3. Plaintiff knowingly, voluntarily and of her own free will placed herself in an WwW unsafe and dangerous position, and therefore assumed all resulting risks. DO 4. Plaintiff failed to use the product described in the complaint in the manner for NN which it was intended, and that misuse directly caused the accident and plaintiff's injuries and damages, Cfo if any. 0 5. The product referred to in the complaint was abused and/or altered in a manner s Rl which was not reasonably foreseeable. That abuse and alteration directly caused the accident and Ona plaintiff's injuries and damages, if any. RE 6. Any damages plaintiff claims were either wholly or partially caused by the Re negligence or other culpable conduct of persons or entities other than ISZA, ITAI, and AIMI, and such RR Dane comparative fault reduces the percentage of fault of ISZA, ITAI and AIML, if any. 7. The liability of ISZA, ITAI and AIMI, if any, is several pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 1430-1432, including but not limited to § 1431.2. 8. Plaintiffs claims against ISZA, ITAI and AIMI are preempted in whole or in part ROR BCOe by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 15 USCS §1392(d), 1966, as amended, and regulations promulgated under it. 9. Plaintiff caused or allowed the vehicle and/or other evidence to be concealed, lost, ® NKR altered, damaged, destroyed, or otherwise spoliated. | BOK ISZA, ITAI and AIMI pray: KN (1) That plaintiff take nothing by her complaint and that the complaint and the action NY RRR be dismissed; NH (2) For its costs; and NO (3) For such other and further relief as the court deems proper. NO SN MIL ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 2 sODMA\PCDOCS\SIONI14957\1 Dated: November Y 2003 BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP iN i WN WW * Vincent Galvin FSF Neil M. Kliebenstein mn Attorneys for Defendants — Isuzu Motors America, Inc., Isuzu Truck USA, Inc., DD and American Isuzu Motors, Inc. wn Co Oo 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT sODMA\PCDOCS\SION 14957\1 . ie addressed w asa follows: 11, "Attorneys for Plaintiff, Anum Lalani, a’a Attorneys for Alamo Rent-A-Car | sminor, by. and through her Guardian ad’ me Alan Zacharin, Esq. : +12 Litem, Shouket. (Richard) Lalani oe cnn ae Andrada & Schanzenbach. ~.: > Michael B.-Moore, Esq. Panc8 180. Grand Avenue, Suite 900: 13]:~: Charles A: Browning, Esq. a ~ Oakland, ‘CA 94612 |Moore & Browning (510):287:4160 aoa “1595 Market'Street, Suite 1320 Fax: 510) 2287- 4161 i 15 San Francisco, GA 94105 a | (415) 956-6500 ~ mea Attorneys. for Ken Ligon ‘and. 16, : “Fax: (415) 956-6580 Christine: Pavel-Ligon: -*. Timothy.F: Pearce, Esq. 17].° ‘Attorneys for Rubina Lalani Hersh &‘Hersh |. Gary Moss, Esq: 7 205° 601°Van Ness Avenue #2080 18 3 || . Moss & Hough are San Francisco, CA- 94102 - ‘| 601 Van Ness Avenue #2030 7a See (415) 444). 5544 os en an ee 19 |, San Francisco, CA ; ‘94102 + py SE Sa Fax:(415) 4441. 7586 “ a oy - *. 20 (415) 399-1110 ee wep Re Ln Be es OE «|, Fax: (415) 399-1552 ce an OE a Es Wee 21° _X_ VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL. I caused such envelope t.to ) be deposited in the mail at San 22 J ose, California; in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid thereof. Iam readily familiar... ‘|; with the firm!s business practice for collection and processing. of correspondence; for mailing, with. 23 the United States Postal Service. The. inail'iis deposited: with: ‘the U.S. Postal Service’ on'that same - : i day i in the ordinary course of business: I ain aware that on “motion of the party served, sérvice. is” ° 24 presumed invalid if the postal cancellation dated or postage. meter date isis more’ than’< ne day after ea 25 - the date of deposit for mailing an affidavit. 26]. labeled, and caused to be deposited into an. a n.cvernight delivery. (F ederal Express; United Paicel < 27 Service, ete. ») receptacle or delivered to. an authorized ¢courier or driver: authorized by. the’ express" - “service carrier to receive documents; ‘in‘an envelope or a package designated by: the express . ae 28 . service carrier with delivery fees paid: or. provided for, addressed to the person ‘on whom it’ is to: arn ODMAWPCDOCS)S,011 o4so2\1 ' : be ne be served, at the office address as last given by that person on any document filed in the case and served on that person; otherwise, at that person's place of residence. VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION. The document was served on the above party in this action by causing a true copy of said document to be transmitted by facsimile to the number listed adjacent to the name on this Proof of Service. The transmission was reported as complete and without error. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on November 4, 2003, at San Jose, California. r » 10 “Evangeline Sabado il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ::ODMA\PCDOCS\SJO\104802\1 3