MAYRA MONTES,ETAL VS CHARLES A.EVANS II,ETAL

Complaint Information

18/84/2012 17:19 415979t BOGAARDSDAVIS PAGE ©02/86

BRIAN R. DAVIS (160817)

MELISSA O'CONNOR (251932) FILED BOGAARDS DAVIS LLP SAN MATEO COUNTY

601 MontgomegalStreet, Suite 1210 San Francisco, California 94111-2616 OCT - 5 T. 415.979.0480 . o 2012 F. 415.979.0482 Q(V) Attorneys for Defendant

CHARLES ALLEN EVANS II SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEOQ UNLIMITED CIVIL JURISDICTION

MAYRA MONTES and POLLINE ) ‘ VILLALOBO, | CaseNo: CIV514757 o ) Plaintiffs, ) DEFENDANT CHARLES ALLEN EVANS v ; II’'S ANSWERTO COMPLAINT ) CHARLES ALLEN EVANS II, BMW ) OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, and ) DOES 1 to 20, ) e

) BY FAX

Defendants, )

COMES NOW defendant, CHARLES ALLEN EVANS II, answering the Complaint on file herein, admits, denies and alleges as follows:

In answer to the unverified Complaint on file herein, and by virtue of the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure Section 431.30, defendant denijes generally and specifically each and every allegation contained therein and the whole thereof. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, defendant denies that plaintiff was injured or damaged in the alleged manner or sum or sums, or in

any other manner or sum or sums or at all.

any other manner or sum or sums or at all. 2 17:19 415979 I BOGAARDSDAVIS PAGE ©84/86

2 17:19 415979 I BOGAARDSDAVIS PAGE ©84/86

FOR A FIFTH. SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE

DEFENSE. DEFENDANT ALLEGES AS FOLLOWS: 5. This defendant is informed and believes and thereon alleges that other persons or

entities, the true names and capacities of which this answering defendant is ignorant, were in some manner negligently responsible for or at fault in proximately causing the damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff herein, and if it should be found at trial of this action that this defendafit and said other persons or entities are legally responsible or at fault in proximately causing said damages, the damages should be awarded against said other persons and entities and this defendant in proportion to the relative fault or negligence, if any.

SEP TE AND AFFIRMATIVE

DEFENSE, DEFENDANT ALLEGES AS FOLLOWS: 6. Plaintiff failed to take reasonable action to avoid or mitigate the alleged detriments or

damages, if any.

FOR A SEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE

DEFENSE. DEFENDANT ALLEGES AS FOLLOWS:

7. This defendant alleges that all canses of action in said Complaint are barred by the applicable statute of limitations, including but without limitation, California Code of Civil Procedure §340(3).

G SEP TE AND AF TIVE

D S ANT ALLEGES AS FOLLOWS: 8. This answering defendant avers that plaintiff fails to state a cause of action against this

answering defendant for the reason that this answering defendant was not the owner of any vehicle involved in conduct complained of, was not the employer of any person or entity involved in conduct complained of, and was not the agent or principal to any person or entity involved in conduct

complained of herein.

DEFENDANT CHARLES ALLEN EVANS II'S ANSWERTO COMPLAINT

110M540451901 8 - 10/4/2012 5:24:42 PM

415979 ! BDGAARDSDAVIS PAGE 85/86

2 17:19 ! INTH. SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE. DEFENDANT ALLEGES AS FOLLOWS: 9. This answering defendant avers plaintiff was not covered by a policy of automobile

insurance at the time of the subject accident or at the times alleged in the Complaint, and therefore the recovery of damages, if any, by plaintiff is limited to the recovery of economic damages only. WHEREFORE, defendant prays that plaintiff take nothing by reason of Complaint on file

herein, for costs of suit incurred herein, and for such other and further relief as this Court deems just

and proper.

October 4, 2012 BOGAARDS DAVIS LLP

MELISSA O’CONNOR

Attorneys for Defendant