KAITLYN BRACKEN VS. JOSEPH C. RICARD

Complaint Information

BHAIRAVI ASHER, ESQ. (SBN 278580) I L E D PHILIP M. ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES UNTY Employees of the Corporate Law Department SAN MATEO CO

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company APR 22 2013 6210 Stoneridge Mall Road, Suite 550

Pleasanton, California 94588 ' , Telephone: (925) 225-6838 Facsimile: (925) 225-6899

Attorneys for Defendants JOSEPH C. RICARD AND MONICA MALFAVON-GOVEA

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO / UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

KAITLYN BRACKEN, NO. CIV519006 Plaintiff, ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED

COMPLAINT

JOSEPH C. RICARD, - MONICA MALFAVON-GEOVEA, DOES 1 TO 25,

NRICIMNAL

of California, these answering defendants deny, generally and specifically, all and singular, each and every allegation contained in the Unverified Complaint of plaintiff herein, and the whole thereof, and specifically deny that plaintiff has been injured or damaged as alleged herein, or in any other sum or manner, or otherwise or at all.

1. AS A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each alleged Cause of Action thereof, these answering defendants allege that plaintiff was careless and negligent in and about the matters referred to in said Complaint, and that said

O 0O ~N O O S~ WO N =

@ cad =2 a2 - 0o ~N O O A WON =2-~ O

carelessness and negligence on plaintiffs own part proximately contributed to the happening of the incident in question, and to the injuries, loss, and damages complained of, if any there were.

2. AS A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each alleged Cause of Action thereof, these answering defendants allege that the injuries and damages complained of by plaintiff, if there were any, were either wholly or in part directly and proximately caused by the negligence of persons or entities other than these answering defendants, and said negligence comparatively reduces the proportion of negligence and corresponding liability of these answering defendants.

3. AS A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each alleged Cause of Action thereof, these answering defendants allege that the injuries, loss and damages complained of, if any there were, were increased by the failure of plaintiff to use reasonable diligence to mitigate them.

4. AS A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each alleged Cause of Action thereof, these answering defendants allege that if liability is assessed against them, pursuant to Civil Code Section 1431 et seq., these answering defendants shall be liable only for the amount of non-economic damages allocated to them in direct

proportion to the percentage of fault assessed against them by the trier of fact and

| request that a separate judgment be rendered against them for that amount.

5. AS AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Complaint and each alleged Cause of Action, these answering defendants are informed and believe that at all times mentioned herein plaintiff was in the course and scope of her employment and that plaintiffs exclusive remedy lies within the workers’ compensation laws; or, in the alternative, the injuries sustained by plaintiff, if any, were caused or contributed to by the carelessness, negligence or other fault of plaintiffs employer and/or said employer's agents, servants or employees and that from any award made to plaintiff these defendants are entitled to a credit, set-off or reduction in damages in an amount in direct proportion to said employer's and/or said employer's agents’, servants’ or employees’

© 0O N O O A~ O N =

& e m e ed = @ o e = 0 ~N O O A~ W N =2 O ©O 0O N O o & WON = O

percentage of fault pursuant to the rule of Witt v. Jackson.

WHEREFORE, these answering defendants pray that plaintiff takes nothing by reason of her Complaint, that these answering defendants have judgment for their costs of suit incurred herein, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem

proper.

Dated: April 22, 2013 PHILIP M. ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES Bhairavi Asher Attorneys for Defendants

JOSEPH C. RICARD and MONICA

MALFAVON-GOVEA

Electronic signature pursuant to Civil Code §1633.7(d).

Answer to Unverified Complaint