This case was last updated from San Mateo County Superior Courts on 06/20/2022 at 06:25:06 (UTC).

LAURIE PANFIL VS NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF ETAL

Case Summary

On 01/24/2013 LAURIE PANFIL filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF ETAL. 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 Grandsaert, John L., Buchwald, Gerald J., Dylina, Steven L., Scott, Joseph C., Grandsaert, John L, Buchwald, Gerald J, Dylina, Steven L, Scott, Joseph C, JOHN L. GRANDSAERT, GERALD J. BUCHWALD, STEVEN L. DYLINA, DYLINA and JOSEPH C. SCOTT. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *****9399

  • Filing Date:

    01/24/2013

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    San Mateo, California

Judge Details

Judges

Grandsaert, John L.

Buchwald, Gerald J.

Dylina, Steven L.

Scott, Joseph C.

Grandsaert, John L

Buchwald, Gerald J

Dylina, Steven L

Scott, Joseph C

JOHN L. GRANDSAERT

GERALD J. BUCHWALD

STEVEN L. DYLINA

DYLINA

JOSEPH C. SCOTT

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

PANFIL, LAURIE

Defendants

WALKER, CHRISTINA

SCHOENDORF, NICHOLAS

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

WIDMANN, RANDALL M

Defendant Attorneys

MURPHY, TIMOTHY P

WALSH, CATHERINE A.

 

Court Documents

Declaration.

DECLARATION (2) Comment DEC: DECLARATION OF RANDALL M. WIDMANN IN SUPPORT OF MEMO IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STRIKE

Case Management Statement.

STATEMENT (11) Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF.

Document.

FILING Comment FILED: DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S 3RD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR RECKLESS ENTRUSTMENT FILED.

Order received.

PROPOSED ORDER (2) Comment POR: PROPOSED ORDER RECEIVED.

Notice.

NOTICE Comment N2: NOTICE OF MOTION & MOTION TO STRIKE PLNTFF.'S PUNITIVE DAMAGES CLAIM FILED BY CHRISTINA WALKER.

Proof of Service of Complaint/Petition.

PROOF OF SERVICE (2) Comment PS: PROOF OF SERVICE (PERSONAL) OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF PANFIL SERVED ON CHRISTINA WALKER WITH SERVICE DATE OF 05/08/13.

Proof of Service of Complaint/Petition.

PROOF OF SERVICE Comment PS: PROOF OF SERVICE (PERSONAL) OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF PANFIL SERVED ON NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF WITH SERVICE DATE OF 02/20/13.

Order.

ORDER Comment O2: ORDER RE: DEFENDANT CHRISTINA WALKER'S MOTION TO STRIKE AND DEMURRER, SIGNED BY JUDGE DYLINA ON 01/31/14 FILED.

Declaration.

DECLARATION Comment DEC: DECLARATION OF RANDALL M. WIDMANN IN SUPPORT OF MEMO IN OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER

Case Management Statement.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF.

Request for Dismissal of - WITH prejudice in its entirety.

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED. Comment REQDEA: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED.

Case Management Statement.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY LAURIE PANFIL. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY LAURIE PANFIL.

Case Management Statement.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF.

Order.

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT CHRISTINA WALKER'S MOTION TO STRIKE AND DEMURRER, SIGNED BY JUDGE DYLINA ON 01 Comment O2: ORDER RE: DEFENDANT, CHRISTINA WALKER'S MOTION TO STRIKE AND DEMURRER, SIGNED BY JUDGE DYLINA ON 01/31/14 FILED.

Case Management Statement.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF.

Case Management Statement.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF.

Case Management Statement.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY LAURIE PANFIL. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY LAURIE PANFIL.

Case Management Statement.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY CHRISTINA WALKER. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY CHRISTINA WALKER.

64 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/08/2014
  • DocketConversion Minute.; Additional Info: Comment NOH: NOTICE OF HEARING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2014
  • DocketConversion Hearing.; Additional Info: Comment OSC RE: DISMISSAL HEARING AS TO DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2014
  • DocketOrder 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

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2014
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketCase Management Statement.; Additional Info: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2014
  • DispositionDisposition: Judgment; Judgment Type: Dismissal - Other Dismissal; Party; Name; WALKER, CHRISTINA; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name; SCHOENDORF, NICHOLAS; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name; PANFIL, LAURIE; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2014
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal of - WITH prejudice in its entirety.; Additional Info: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED. Comment REQDEA: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/03/2014
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketCase Management Statement.; Additional Info: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY LAURIE PANFIL. Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY LAURIE PANFIL.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/03/2014
  • DocketConversion Minute.; Additional Info: Comment COM1: - 25 -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/03/2014
  • DocketConversion Minute.; Additional Info: Comment MICMS: ENTERED BY C LYSSAND ON 04/03/14.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/03/2014
  • DocketConversion Minute.; Additional Info: Comment HCMO: OSC RE: DISMISSAL HEARING AS TO DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION SET FOR 07/08/14 AT 09:00 IN DEPARTMENT 7

    Read MoreRead Less
152 More Docket Entries
  • 03/18/2013
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketProof of Service of Complaint/Petition.; Additional Info: PROOF OF SERVICE (PERSONAL) OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF PANFIL SERVED ON NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF WITH S Comment PS: PROOF OF SERVICE (PERSONAL) OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF PANFIL SERVED ON NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF WITH SERVICE DATE OF 02/20/13.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • FinancialFinancial info for PANFIL, LAURIE; Case Payment Receipt # 201301240787 PANFIL, LAURIE $435.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • FinancialFinancial info for PANFIL, LAURIE; Transaction Assessment $435.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • FinancialFinancial; PANFIL, LAURIE; Total Financial Assessment $585.00; Total Payments and Credits $585.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • DocketCause Of Action.; Additional Info: Action Complaint File Date 01/24/2013

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • DocketNew Filed Case.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet.; Additional Info: CIVIL CASE COVERSHEET RECEIVED Comment CCS: CIVIL CASE COVERSHEET RECEIVED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketSummons Issued / Filed.; Additional Info: 30 DAY SUMMONS ISSUED AND FILED. Comment S30IF: 30 DAY SUMMONS, ISSUED AND FILED.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • DocketConversion Minute.; Additional Info: Comment *FEE: 130124-0787-CK 194/ 435.00 PAYMT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2013
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketComplaint.; Additional Info: (S) COMPLAINT FILED Comment COM: (S) COMPLAINT FILED

    Read MoreRead Less

Complaint Information

2 FAX 408 293 9056 Knox Services KSJ @001/005

NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN MATEO IN AND FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

LAURIE PANFIL, CASE NO. CIV519399 Plaintiff, ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF, CHRISTINA WALKER, DOE ONE THROUGH DOE (Date Complaint Filed: January 24, 2013) FIFTY, INCLUSIVE,

Defendants.

Defendant NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF answering the Complaint on file herein alleges as follows: |

Pursuant to the provisions of the California Code of Civil Procedure, this answering defendant generally denies every allegation of each cause of action alleged therein, and further denies that plaintiff suffered injury or damage in the amount alleged, or in any other amount.

FOR A FIRST SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH CAUSE

OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:

The Complaint and each cause of action fail to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering defendant.

FOR A SECOND SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH

CAUSE OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:

CAUSE OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED: 2 FAX 408 293 9056 Knox Services KSJ 0027005

2 FAX 408 293 9056 Knox Services KSJ 0027005

The Complaint and each cause of action therein is barred by the applicable statutes of limitation, including but not limited to, California Code of Civil Procedure, §§335.1, 337(1-3), 337.1(a-f), 337.15(a-g), 338(1-7), 339(1-10, 340(1-5), 340.5 and 364(a-f).

FOR A THIRD SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH CAUSE

OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:

Civil Code §§1431.1, et. seq., limits general damages and abate joint and several liability. This defendant requests that the Court apportion the damages, if any, and require this answering defendant to pay only his fair and legal percentage of liability as determined by the trier of fact and/or law.

FOR A FOURTH SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH

CAUSE OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:

Any and all events, injuries, loss, damages and expenditures referred to in the Complaint were directly and proximately caused and contributed to by the carelessness and negligence of plaintiff, and the extent of damages sustained by the plaintiff, if any, should be reduced in proportion to the amount of negligence of the plaintiff.

FOR A FIFTH SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH CAUSE

OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:

The accident, injury, and damages alleged in the Complaint were either wholly or in part proximately caused by the negligence and fault of persons, corporations or entities other than this answering defendant, and the negligence of such other persons, corporations, and/or entities comparatively reduces the percentage of negligence, if any, attributed to this answering defendant.

FOR A SIXTH SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH CAUSE

OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:

That by the exercise of reasonable effort, plaintiff could have mitigated the amount of

damages he suffered; but plaintiff failed and refused, and contir;ucs to fail and refuse, to exercise

a reasonable effort to mitigate the damages.

a reasonable effort to mitigate the damages. 2 FAX 408 293 9056 Knox Services KSJ @003/005

2 FAX 408 293 9056 Knox Services KSJ @003/005

FOR A SEVENTH SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH

CAUSE OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:"

That the alleged accident, injuries and damages, if any, were proximately caused by plaintiff’s implied agreement to voluntarily assume the risk of a known danger. The risk encountered by plaintiff was one inherent in the activity in question, and was therefore a reasonable risk. Thus, plaintiff’s reasonable implied assumption of the risk acts as a complete bar to his recovery.

FOR A EIGHTH SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH

CAUSE OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:

That the plaintiff is barred from recovering any and all non-economic damages, pursuant to the provisions of California Civil Code Section 3333.4 [second enacted].

FOR A NINTH SEPARATE AND DISTINCT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO EACH CAUSE

OF ACTION, IT IS ALLEGED:

That the Plaintiff’s complaint, to the extent it seeks exemplary or punitive damages, violates defendant’s rights to procedural due process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 6 of the California Constitution. Furthermore, this provision violates the defendant’s right to protection from “excessive fines” as provided in the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 12 of the California Constitution; and therefore, fails to state a cause of action supporting the punitive or exemplary damages claimed.

WHEREFORE, this answering defendant prays:

1. That plaintiff take nothing by reason of the Complaint;

2. That defendant has judgment for attomeys’ fees and costs of

suit herein incurred; and

suit herein incurred; and 03/19/2013 15:42 FAX 408 293 9056 Knox Services KSJ [@004/005

03/19/2013 15:42 FAX 408 293 9056 Knox Services KSJ [@004/005

! 3. For such other and further relief as to the Court seems just and proper.

DATED: March 18, 2013 LAW OFFICES OF CATHERINE A. WALSH

CATHERINE WALSH

6 Attorney for Defendant

NICHOLAS SCHOENDORF

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer Timothy P Murphy

Latest cases represented by Lawyer WALSH, CATHERINE A.