Preview
Filing #65795482 E-Filed 12/26/2017 01:23:43 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO. 2017-CA-7814-O
BILLY BAILEY and MARIA BAILEY,
Individually and “8 Husband and Wife,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
DANA HANA FISHER, MESHULAM and
SHULY FISHER, and ESURANCE PROPERTY
AND CASUALTY INSURANCE, a Foreign
Corporation,
Defendants.
wane
eee ene panne nnn nnn nnn
ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Defendant, ESURANCE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE, by and through
undersigned Counsel, sets forth as its Answer & Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Complaint as
follows:
1 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
2. Admitted.
3 Admitted.
4 Admitted,
5 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
6 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
7 Admitted subject to all terms and conditions of said policy of insurance.
8 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
9 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
COUNTI
10. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the
allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 through 9 as if the same were set forth at length herein.
11. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
12, Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
COUNT IL
13. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the
allegations contained within Paragraphs | through 12 as if the same were set forth at length
herein.
14, Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
15. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
COUNT Il
16. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the
allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 through 15 as if the same were set forth at length
i
herein.
17. Admitted subject to all terms and conditions of said policy of insurance.
18. Admitted subject to all terms and conditions of said policy of insurance.
19. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
20. Denied.
21. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
;
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
22. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
COUNT IV
23. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the
allegations contained within Paragraphs | through 22 as if the same were set forth at length
herein.
24. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
25. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
i
COUNT V
26. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the
allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 through 25 as if the same were set forth at length
herein.
27. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
t
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
28. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
COUNT VI
29. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the
allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 through 28 as if the same were set forth at length
herein.
30. Admitted subject to all terms and conditions of said policy of insurance.
31. Admitted,
32. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
33. Denied,
34. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
35. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this
paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
36. Defendant specifically asserts that, in the incident complained of, the Plaintiff
is not entitled to maintain this action under Florida Statutes §§627.727(7)and 627.737, and
affirmatively allege that such statute commonly referred to as "Florida's No-Fault Threshold"
specifically bars the Plaintiff(s) from any action and recovery thereof.
37. At all times material hereto the Plaintiff, Maria Bailey, so negligently and
carelessly operated her motor vehicle so as to be the sole proximate cause of the injuries and
damages complained of, if any; or in the alternative such negligence was a contribu
ting factor to
the accident and alleged injuries and damages for which the Defendant is
entitled to
proportionate reduction under the Doctrine of Comparative Negligence.
38. Defendant alleges that in any action arising out of the incident complained of,
Defendant is entitled to all rights, reductions, and set-offs afforded under Florida Statutes
including, but not limited to, §§627.736(3), 627.7372, and 768.76.
f
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
39. Defendant demands a trial by jury on all issues of fact triable by right before
a jury.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was furnished by
electronic mail via the Court’s E-Portal to all known designated addresses for Kathlee
n S.
Davies, Esq., attorney for the Plaintiffs, (not included ph aicédings) » whose office is located at
126 East Jefferson Street, Orlando, FL 32801 this lt day of December, 2017.
CAMERON, HODGES. COLEMAN,
LaPOINTE & W1 HT, P.A
VI T, Ill, ESQ
Florida Bar No. 3141
JULIA PINNELL, ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 0899429
150 So. Palmetto Avenue
Suite 200
Daytona Beach, FL 32114
Phone: 386-257-1755
Fax 386-252-5601
Designated Electronic Mail:
serviceJP@cameronhodges2.com
Preview
Filing #65795482 E-Filed 12/26/2017 01:23:43 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 2017-CA-7814-O BILLY BAILEY and MARIA BAILEY, Individually and “8 Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs, vs. DANA HANA FISHER, MESHULAM and SHULY FISHER, and ESURANCE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE, a Foreign Corporation, Defendants. wane eee ene panne nnn nnn nnn ANSWER & AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Defendant, ESURANCE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE, by and through undersigned Counsel, sets forth as its Answer & Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff's Complaint as follows: 1 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 2. Admitted. 3 Admitted. 4 Admitted, 5 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 6 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 7 Admitted subject to all terms and conditions of said policy of insurance. 8 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 9 Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. COUNTI 10. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 through 9 as if the same were set forth at length herein. 11. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 12, Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. COUNT IL 13. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the allegations contained within Paragraphs | through 12 as if the same were set forth at length herein. 14, Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 15. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. COUNT Il 16. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 through 15 as if the same were set forth at length i herein. 17. Admitted subject to all terms and conditions of said policy of insurance. 18. Admitted subject to all terms and conditions of said policy of insurance. 19. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 20. Denied. 21. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this ; paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 22. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. COUNT IV 23. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the allegations contained within Paragraphs | through 22 as if the same were set forth at length herein. 24. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 25. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. i COUNT V 26. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 through 25 as if the same were set forth at length herein. 27. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this t paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 28. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. COUNT VI 29. Defendant would repeat and reiterate each and every response to the allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 through 28 as if the same were set forth at length herein. 30. Admitted subject to all terms and conditions of said policy of insurance. 31. Admitted, 32. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 33. Denied, 34. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. 35. Defendant is without knowledge as to the allegations contained within this paragraph and would therefore deny, demanding strict proof thereof. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 36. Defendant specifically asserts that, in the incident complained of, the Plaintiff is not entitled to maintain this action under Florida Statutes §§627.727(7)and 627.737, and affirmatively allege that such statute commonly referred to as "Florida's No-Fault Threshold" specifically bars the Plaintiff(s) from any action and recovery thereof. 37. At all times material hereto the Plaintiff, Maria Bailey, so negligently and carelessly operated her motor vehicle so as to be the sole proximate cause of the injuries and damages complained of, if any; or in the alternative such negligence was a contribu ting factor to the accident and alleged injuries and damages for which the Defendant is entitled to proportionate reduction under the Doctrine of Comparative Negligence. 38. Defendant alleges that in any action arising out of the incident complained of, Defendant is entitled to all rights, reductions, and set-offs afforded under Florida Statutes including, but not limited to, §§627.736(3), 627.7372, and 768.76. f DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 39. Defendant demands a trial by jury on all issues of fact triable by right before a jury. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was furnished by electronic mail via the Court’s E-Portal to all known designated addresses for Kathlee n S. Davies, Esq., attorney for the Plaintiffs, (not included ph aicédings) » whose office is located at 126 East Jefferson Street, Orlando, FL 32801 this lt day of December, 2017. CAMERON, HODGES. COLEMAN, LaPOINTE & W1 HT, P.A VI T, Ill, ESQ Florida Bar No. 3141 JULIA PINNELL, ESQ. Florida Bar No. 0899429 150 So. Palmetto Avenue Suite 200 Daytona Beach, FL 32114 Phone: 386-257-1755 Fax 386-252-5601 Designated Electronic Mail: serviceJP@cameronhodges2.com