On 01/09/2013 KAITLYN BRACKEN filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against JOSEPH C RICARD. This case was filed in San Mateo County Superior Courts, Southern Branch Hall Of Justice And Records located in San Mateo, California. The Judges overseeing this case are Foiles, Robert D, Dylina, Steven L and Dylina, Steven L.. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
*****9006
01/09/2013
Disposed - Dismissed
San Mateo County Superior Courts
Southern Branch Hall Of Justice And Records
San Mateo, California
Foiles, Robert D
Dylina, Steven L
Dylina, Steven L.
KAITLYN BRACKEN
BRACKEN, KAITLYN
JOSEPH C RICARD
MONICA MALFAVON-GOVEN
MALFAVON-GOVEN, MONICA
RICARD, JOSEPH C
RIBERA, SANDRA L
SIGUENZA, DEIDRE M
ASHER, BHAIRAVI
DAVIS, BRIAN R
DISMISSAL Comment REQDEA: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED.
NOTICE (4) Comment NS2: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT FILED BY KAITLYN BRACKEN.
ATTORNEY (4) Comment SAT: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY FILED. FORMER ATTORNEY BHAIRAVI ASHER REMOVED AS TO MONICA MALFAVON-GOVEN AND REPLACED WITH ATTORNEY DEIDRE M SIGUENZA.
ATTORNEY (2) Comment SAT: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY FILED. FORMER ATTORNEY BHAIRAVI ASHER REMOVED AS TO JOSEPH C RICARD AND REPLACED WITH ATTORNEY BRIAN R DAVIS.
ATTORNEY Comment AA1: ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT JOSEPH C RICARD FILED ASSOCIATING BRIAN R DAVIS WITH CURRENT COUNSEL OF RECORD BHAIRAVI ASHER
PROPOSED ORDER Comment POR: PROPOSED ORDER RECEIVED.
FILING Comment FILED: PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF DEPOSIT OF JURY FEES FILED.
ANSWER Comment ANS: (S) ANSWER TO COMPLAINT OF BRACKEN FILED BY JOSEPH C RICARD MONICA MALFAVON-GOVEN, REPRESENTED BY BHAIRAVI ASHER
SUMMONS Comment S30IF: 30 DAY SUMMONS ISSUED AND FILED.
FILING (2) Comment FILED: NOTICE OF HEARING: OSC FOR DISMISSAL AFTER COURT'S RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT FILED.
ATTORNEY (3) Comment AA1: ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT MONICA MALFAVON-GOVEN JOSEPH C RICARD FILED ASSOCIATING DEIDRE M SIGUENZA WITH CURRENT COUNSEL OF RECORD BHAIRAVI ASHER
ORDER (2) Comment O: ORDER SHORTENING TIME SIGNED BY JUDGE R. FOILES ON 01/09/14, FILED.
APPLICATION Comment EPA: EX-PARTE APPLICATION OF AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO SET DEFS' MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL FILED BY JOSEPH C RICARD MONICA MALFAVON-GOVEN
NOTICE (2) Comment NM: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE FILED BY MONICA MALFAVON-GOVEN JOSEPH C RICARD
ORDER Comment SOADR: STIP AND ORDER TO ADR SIGNED BY STEVEN L. DYLINA ON 07/24/13
STATEMENT (2) Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY KAITLYN BRACKEN.
COVERSHEET Comment CCS: CIVIL CASE COVERSHEET RECEIVED
COMPLAINT Comment COM: (S) COMPLAINT FILED
Disposition: Judgment; Judgment Type; Dismissal - Other Dismissal; Party; Name: MALFAVON-GOVEN MONICA; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name: RICARD, JOSEPH C; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name: BRACKEN, KAITLYN; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT.
Conversion Hearing. Additional Info: Comment JURY TRIAL. TIME ESTIMATE: 5 DAYS 00:00 HOURS.
Jury Trial. Additional Info: Hearing Time 9:00 AM Cancel Reason Vacated Comment Dept: PJ JURY TRIAL. TIME ESTIMATE: 5 DAYS 00:00 HOURS.
Conversion Hearing. Additional Info: Comment MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
Settlement Conference. Additional Info: Hearing Time 01:30 PM Cancel Reason Vacated Comment Dept: 7 MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
Conversion Hearing. Additional Info: Comment OSC RE: DISMISSAL HEARING AS TO DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION AFTER NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT
Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal. Additional Info: Hearing Time 9:00 AM Cancel Reason Vacated Comment Dept: 7 OSC RE: DISMISSAL HEARING AS TO DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION AFTER NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT
Request for Dismissal of - WITH prejudice in its entirety. Additional Info: DISMISSAL Comment REQDEA: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED.
Document. Additional Info: FILING (2) Comment FILED: NOTICE OF HEARING: OSC FOR DISMISSAL AFTER COURT'S RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT FILED.
Conversion Action. Additional Info: NOTICE (4) Comment NS2: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT FILED BY KAITLYN BRACKEN.
Conversion Action. Additional Info: Comment *XFR: --> CASE NUMBER CHANGED FROM CLJ/519006 TO CIV/519006.
Civil Case Cover Sheet. Additional Info: COVERSHEET Comment CCS: CIVIL CASE COVERSHEET RECEIVED
Summons Issued / Filed. Additional Info: SUMMONS Comment S30IF: 30 DAY SUMMONS ISSUED AND FILED.
Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment *FEE: 130109-0555-CK 194/ 435.00 PAYMT
Complaint. Additional Info: COMPLAINT Comment COM: (S) COMPLAINT FILED
Financial info for BRACKEN, KAITLYN : Case Payment Receipt # 201306060298 BRACKEN, KAITLYN $150.00
Financial info for BRACKEN, KAITLYN : Transaction Assessment $150.00
Financial info for BRACKEN, KAITLYN : Case Payment Receipt # 201301090555 BRACKEN, KAITLYN $435.00
Financial info for BRACKEN, KAITLYN : Transaction Assessment $435.00
Financial: BRACKEN, KAITLYN; Total Financial Assessment $585.00; Total Payments and Credits $585.00
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
KAITLYN BRACKEN, NO. CIV519006 Plaintiff, ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED
JOSEPH C. RICARD, - MONICA MALFAVON-GEOVEA, DOES 1 TO 25,
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
@ 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’
& 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
Electronic signature pursuant to Civil Code §1633.7(d).
Answer to Unverified Complaint