ORIGINAL ImS~comAymugS~te1900

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "ORIGINAL ImS~comAymugS~te1900"

Transcription

1 SUPEROR COURT OF WASHNGTON FOR KNG COUNTY MARA C. FEDERC, a single woman, NO SEA Plaintiff, VS. U-HAUL ~~TERNATONAL, NC., a foreign corporation, U-HAUL CO. OF WASHNGTON, a Washington corporation, CAPRON HOLDNGS, NC., d/b/a/ LAm HLLS TEXACO, a Washington corporation, and JAMES HEFLEY and JANE DOE HEFLEY, individually and the ma.rita community thereof, PLANTW'S FRST AMENDED COMPLANT Defendants. COMES NOW the Piaintisiviaria C. Federid a d dabs aid dleges zs fillows:. PARTES ( 1.1 At all times material hereto, Plaintiff Maria C. Federici, was a single woman residing in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. PLA;\J'rmF'S F?RST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 1 LAW OFRCES BENNETT BGXOW &: LEEDOM, P.S. ORGNAL ms~comaymugs~te1900 Seattle, Washington T (206) F: (206)

2 1.2 At all times material hereto, Defendant U-Haul nternational, nc. (hereinafter LV-Haul nternational'') was a foreign corporation transacting business in the State of Washington and in King County, Washington. 1.3 At all times material hereto, Defendant U-Haul Co. of Washington (hereinafter "U-Haul of Washington") was a Washington corporation transacting business in fhe State of Washington and in King County, Washington. 1.4 Based upon infonnation and belief, Defendant U-Haul nternational was the holding company for Defendant U-Haul of Washington andlor controlled the business activities of Defendant U-Haul of Washington at an times material hereto. 1.5 At all times material hereto, Defendant Capron Holdings, nc., dba Lake Hills Texaco (hereinafier "Capron") was a Washington corporation transacting business in the State of Washington and in King County, Washington. n its capacity as a U-Haul dealer, Defendant Capron leased U-Haul products to the general public from its location at " Ave. NE, Bellevue, Washington, Based upon information and belief Defendant U-Haul of Washington was the local ageat of Defendant U-Haul nternational for purposes of Defendant Capron's activities as 'a U-Haul dealer at all times material hereto. 1.7 Based upon infomation and beliec Defendants James Hefley and Jane Doe Hefley were husband and wife and residents of the State of Washington at all times material hereto. The true irst name of Defendant Jane Doe Hefley is unknown at this time and she is sued under the fictional name "Jane Doe." All acts alleged herein done by James Hefley were done for and on behalf of their marital community. P M m ' S FRST AMENDED COMPWT Page 2 L4W OFFCES BENNEAT BGELOW 9E LEWOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Suite 190D Seattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

3 U. JURSDCTON AND VEhm 2.1 Defendant U-Haul nternational, Defendant U-Haul of Washington, anc Defendant Capron, at all times material hereto, were in the business of manufacturing, leasin: and/or renting various kinds of equipment (hereinafter "leasing'? and "renting" will be usec synonymously), including trailers. 2.2 Defendant U-Haul nternational, Defendant U-Haul of Washington, anc Defendant Capron, at all times material hereto, were the owners and lessors of a certain twelvc (12) foot open utility trailer identified as RO with a "Texas Rental Trailer" license platc 79R 883 bereinafter "the trailer"), which was rented to James Hefley in King County, Washington on February 22, 2004, under U-Haul Equipment Rental Conkact Numba The incident which caused fhe injuries to Plaintiff upon which this Complaint i: based occurred on nterstate 405 near Renton, King County, washing to^^. 2.4 This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to RCW This court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants pursuant to RCW because they transacted business within the State of Washington, committed tortious acts within the State of Washington, and owned, used, or possesseci property within the Siate of Washington. 2.6 Venue is proper in King County pursuant to RCW (1) because Defendant U-Haul nternational, Defendant U-Haul of Washington and Defendant Capron transact business in King County, have an office for the transaction of business in King County, PLANTFF'S FRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 3 LAW omm BENNET BGELOW & LEEDOM, P-S 1700 Swenth Avenue, Suite 1900 Seattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

4 and transacted business in King County at the time this cause of action arose. Venue is also proper in King County pursuant to RCW (1) because the registered agents for service of process for Defendant U-Haul of Washington and Defendant Capron reside in King County. Venue is also proper in King County pursuant to RCW (3) because the torts alleged herein occurred in King County.. FACTS 3.1 njuries suffered by Plaintiff Maria Federici on February 22, 2004 were caused when a piece of furniture was launched from the U-Haul open utility trailer identified herein, smashed throu& the windshield of her car, and struck her he. mmediately before she was injured, Plaintiff Maria Federici was driving southbound on nterstate 405 in a reasonable manner and at a reasonable distance behind the &Haul kailer being towed by a Dodge Ram "quad cab" driven by Defendant James Hefley. 3.2 The trailer fiom which the piece of fixnitme that struck Plaintiff was launched was a U-Haul open utility trailer, identified as "the trailer" herein. There were no restrictions in the contract as to the type of material that could be hauled in the trailer. 3.3 The trailer beats a stamp indicating that the trailer was manufactured by Defendant U-Haul nternational. According to the jointly filed Form 10-K Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, filed for the fiscal yea. ended March 31,2005, Defendant U-Haul Ltlternational manufactures U-Had trailers at U-Haul operated manufacturing and assembly facilities located throughout the United States. 3.4 James Hefley and U-Haul nternational, acting through its actual or apparenl agents, mutually consented at the time of the rental transaction that James Hefley shall act in PLANTE"F9S FRST 9MENDm COMPLANT Page 4 LAW OFFCES BENPRXT BCEWW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Suite 900 Sdej Washington T: (206) F: (206)

5 such a way that was in U-Hau nternational's interest and/or on U-Haul nternational's behalf and further mutually consented that James Hefley would act subject to the control of U-Haul nternational andlor its actual or apparent agents. As such, an agency relationship existed at the time of the accident between U-Haul nternational and James Hefley. 3.5 James Hefley and U-Haul of Washington, acting though its actual or apparenl agents, mutually consented at the time of the renta transaction that James Hefley shall act ir such a way that was in U-Haul of Washington's interest andfor on U-Haul of Washington's behalf, and hrther mutually consented that James Hefley would act subject to the control of U- Haul of Washington andlor its actual or apparent agents. As such, an agency relations% existed at the time of the accident between U-Haul of Washington and James Hefley. 3.6 James Hefley and Capron, acting through its actual or apparent agents, mutuall3 consented at the time of the rental transaction that James Hefley shall act in such a way that wa in Capron's interest andlor on Capron's behalf, and further mutually consented that Jam= Hefley would act subject to the control of Capron andor its actual or apparent agents. As such, an agency relationship existed at the time of the accident between Capron and James Hefley. nt. FRST CAUSE OF ACTON: U-lBAUL NTERNATONAL, STRCT LABLTY FOR PRODUCT NOT REASONABLY SAFE AS DESGNED 4.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 3.9 above as il stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: 4.2 U-Haul nternational is a product seller under RCPV (1) because it is engaged in the business of selling products. PLANTFF'S FRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 5 LAW OFFl- BE- BGELOW % LEXDOM, PA 1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1900 SeaNe, Washington 9SlO T: (206) F: (206)

6 4.3 U-Haul Tnternational is a manufacturer under RCW O(2) because U-Haul nternational designed, produced, made, fabricated constructed, or remanufactured the trailer 1 before its sale to a user or consumer. 4.4 U-Haul nternational is a manufacturer under RC W O(2) because U-Haul 1 nternational held itself out as the rninufacturer of the trailer U-Haul nternational has the liabiliq of a manufacturer under RCW (2)(d) because U-Haul nternational provided the plans or specifications for the manufacture or preparation of the trailer and such plans or specifications were a proximate cause of the defect in the trailer. 4.6 U-Haul nternational has the liability of a manufacturer under RCW (2)(e) because the trailer was marketed under the trade name or brand name of U-Haul. 4.7 U-Haul nternational has the liability of a manufacturer under RCW et seq. because U-Haul ntmational's leasing activities are sufficiently great to justify holding it accountable for the acts of a manufacturer The trailer was not reasonably safe as designed under RCV (1)(a) because, at the time of manufacture, the likelihood that the trailer would cause injury or damage similar to that claimed by Plaintiff Maria Federici, and the seriousness of such injury or damage, outweighed the burden on U-Haul nternational to design a trailer that would have prevented the 1 injury or damage and outweighed the adverse effect that an alternative design that was practical 1 PLANTLEF'S FRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 6 LAW OFFCES BGEX.O\y ;Pr LEEDOM, PS 1700 Seventh Avenue, Snitc 1900 Seattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206) B m

7 4.9 The trailer was not reasonably safe as designed under RCW (1)(a) because the trailer was unsafe to a11 extent beyond that which would be contemplated by an ordinary user The trailer was not rcasonaby safe as designed at the time the trailer left U-Haul nternational's control The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff Maria Federici. V. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTON: U-J3AUL XNlXRNATONAL STRCT LABTLTY FOR DEFECT M CONSTRUCTON 5.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 4.11 above as if stated llly herein, and further alleges as follows: 5.2 The trailer was not reasonably safe in construction under RCW (2) because, when the trailer lea the control of U-Haul nternational, the trailer deviated in some material way gom the design specifications or performance standards of U-Haul nternational, or deviated in some material way gom otherwise identical units in the same product line. 5.3 The trailer was not reasonably safe in construction under RCW (2) because the trailer was unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by an ordinary user. i 5.4 U-Haul nternational supplied a product that was not reasonably safe in construction at the time the product left U-Haul Tnternational's control. 5.5 The unsdc condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff Maria Federici. PXAZNTFF'SFRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 7 LAW 0mcES BENWET BGELOW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Suite 1900 Seattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

8 V. THRD CAUSE OF ACTON: - U-HAUL LTERNATONAL, STRCT LABLTY FOR FALURE TO PROVDE ADEQUATE WARN~GS OR NSTRUCTONS wrra THE PRODUCT 6.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set fo~th in paragraphs 1.1 though 5.5 above as if stated filly herein, and fiuther alleges as follows: 6.2 Under RCW the trailer was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided with the trailer because, at the time of manufacture, he likelihood that the trailer would cause injury or damage similar to that claimed by Plaintiff Maria Federici, and the seriousness of such injury or damage, rendered the wamings or instructions of U-Hau nternational inadequate, and U-Haul nternational could have provided ~dequate warnings or instructions. 6.3 Under RCW the trailer was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided with the trailer because the trailer was unsafe to an ~xtent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary user. 6.4 The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage LO Plaintiff Maria Federici. V. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-HAUL NTERNATONAL, NEGLGENT FATLURE TO PROVDE ADEQUATE WARNNGS AFTER THE PRODUCT WAS MANUFACTURED 7.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 6.4 above as if stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: 7.2 Under RCW (1)(~), the trailer was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided after the trailer was manufactured because U-Haul PLANTFF'S FRST QMENDED COME'LANT Page 8 LAW OFFCES B E r i i BGELOW & mom, P Scventh Avenue, Suite 1900 Seattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

9 nternational learned, or a reasonably prudent manufacturer should have learned, about a danger 1 2 connected with the trailer after it was manufactured Under RCW (1)(~), U-Haul lntemational had a duty to act with regard to 8 9 (issuing warnings or instructions concerning the danger in the manner that a reasonably prudent, 1 manufacturer would act in the same or similar circumstances. 7.4 The trailer was unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by an ordinary user. 7.5 The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage 10 to Plaintiff Maria Federici. VT. FFTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-BAUL NTERNATONAL, NEGLGENT FALURE TO WARN l3 8.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 7.5 above as if1 1 l4 stated fully herein, and fvnher alleper as foilors: l5 8.2 As a manufacturer or supplier of products made available for lease to customers l6 1 of U-Haul dealers, U-Haul nternational had a duty to exercise reasonable care to warn customers of U-Haul dealers of dangers associated with the products leased fiom U-Haul dealers. 8.3 TLT-Ea-d kteci.z~gnaf bs=jj or had rmon to lmow that &Ale ' v-rn ZG.t WaJ Ul W W 21 1 likely to be dangerous for the use for which it was supplied U-Haul nternational had no reason to believe that those for whose use the trailer was supplied would realize its dan~erous condition U-Haul nternational failed to exercise reasonable care to inform James Hefley of 25 / the dangerous condition of the trailer or of the facts which would make it likely to be dangerous Prnrn'S ]FRST ANENDED COrnLrnT Page 9 AW OFFlCES BENNETT BGELOW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Suite 1900 Sde, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

10 5.6 The failure of U-Haul nternational to exercise reasonable care to warn James Hefley of the dangerous condition of the trailer or of the facts which would make it likely to be dangerous proximately caused injury to Plaintiff Maria Federici. 5.7 Had James Hefley been warned by U-Haul nternatio~lal of the dangerous condition of the trailer or of the facts which would make it ikely to be dangerous, he would have secured the load that was launched fiom the trailer and not proximately caused injury to ( 1 Plaintiff Maria Fededci. X. SXXTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-HAUL NTEWATONAL, NEGLGENT LEASE OP CHATTEL FOR MRlEDATE USE 9.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 5.7 above as if stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: As a manufacturer or supplier of products made available for lease to customers of U-Haul dealers, U-Haul nternational had a duty to exercise reasonable care to make the trailer safe for immediate use or to disclose the trailer's actual condition to customers U-Haul nternational knew or should have known that James Hefley would( immediately use the trailer. 9.4 U-Haul nternational failed to exercise reasonable care to make the trailer safe fir immediate use or to disdose he kaiier's aciuai wnciiiion to James Eiefiey The neghgence of U-Haul nternational in failing to exercise reasonable care to make the t r d ~ safe for immediate use or to disclose the trailer's actual condition to James 1 Hefley proximatey caused injury to Plaintiff Maria Federici. PLANTFF'S FlRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 10 LAW OFFCES BENNEAT BGELOW 9r LEEDOM, P S 1700 Seventh Avenue, Smte 1900 Seattle, Washmgton T: (206) F: (206)

11 X. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTJON: U-HALX NTERNATONAL, NEGLGENT PROVSON OF CHATTEL UNLKELY TO BE MADE SAX FOR USE 10.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 9.5 above as if stated &lly herein, and further alleges as follows: 10.2 As a manufacturer or supplier of products made available for lease to customers 1 of U-Haul dealers, U-Haul nternational had a duty to exercise reasonable care not to provide for lease to customers chattels that were unlikely to be made safe for use U-Haul hternational supplied the trailer to James Hefley knowing or having reason to know that the trailer was unlikely to be made reasonably safe before being put to a use which U-Haul nternational should expect it to be put James Hefley was ignorant of the dangerous character of the trailer The negligence of U-Haul nternational in supplying the trailer to James Hefley, knowing or having reason to know that the trailer was unlikely to be made reasonably safe before James Hefley put it to a use which U-Haul Zntcmational should expect it to be put, proximately caused injury to Plaintiff Maria Federici X. EGECTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-HAUL NTERNATONAL, NEGLGENT ENTRUSTMENT 1.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 10.5 above as if stated fully herein, and finther alleges as follows: 11.2 As a manufacturer or supplier of products made available for lease to customers ( of U-Haul dealers, U-Haul nternational andlor its actual or apparent agents exercised control 1 over the trailer and was responsible for the use of the trailer for purposes of negligent PLASTZFP'S FRST 1 AMENDED COMPLANT Page 11 LAW OFFCES BliXWElT BGELOW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenuq Suite 1900 Seattlq Washingbn T: (206) F: (206)

12 entrustment U-Haul nternational and/or its actual or apparent agents knew, or should have known in the exercise of ordinary care, that James Hefley at the time of the rental transaction was reckless, heedless, or incompetent The negligence of U-Haul nternational and.101- its actual or apparent agents in entrusting the trailer to James Hefley, knowing or having reason to know that James Hefley at the time of the rental transaction was reckless, heedless, or incompetent, proximately caused injury to Plaintiff Maria Federici. XU. NNTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-KAUL OF WASHNGTON, STUCT 1,ABLLTY FOR PRODUCT NOT REASONABLY SAFE AS DESGNED 12.1 Plaintiff realleges the fads set forth in paragraphs 2.1 througb above as if stated llly herein, and further alleges as follows: 12.2 U-Haul of Washington is a product seller under RCTN (1) because it is engaged in the business of selling products U-Haul of Washington has the liability of a manufacturer under RCW (2)(c) because L7-Haul of Washington is a controlled subsidiary of U-Haul nternational U-Haul of Washington has the liability of manufacturer under RCW (2)(e) because the trailer was marketed under a trade name or brand name of U-Haul U-Haul of Washington has the liability of a manufacturer under RCW et seq. because U-Haul of Washington's leasing activities are sufficiently great to justify holding it accountable for the acts of a manufacturer. PLrnrn'S FRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 12 LAW omm B E m BGELOW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Suite 1900 Seattle, Washington T:(206) F: (206)

13 2.6 The trailer was not reasonably safe as designed under RCW 7.'72.030(1)(a) 1 2 because, at tl~e time of manufacture, the likelihood that the trailer would cause injury or damage 3, similar to that claimed by Plaintiff 1Man'a Federici, and the seriousness of such injury or damage, outweighed the burden on U-Haul of Washington to design a trailer that would have prevented 1 the injury or damage and outweighed the adverse effect that an alternative design that was 1 mixtical and feasible would have on the uusefuloess of the trailer The trailer was not reasonably safe as designed under RCW (1)(a) 1 because the trailer was unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by an ordinary user The trailer was not reasonaby safe as designed at the time the trailer left U-Haul of Washington's control The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff Maria Federici. XTU[. TENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-EAUL OF WASHNGTON, STRCT LABLTY FOR DEFXCT N CONSTRUCTON 13.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 12.9 above as if stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: 13.2 The trailer was not reasonably safe in construction under RCW (2) because, when the trailer left the control of U-Haul of Washington, the trailer deviated in some material way from the design specifications or perlbrmance standards of U-Haul of Washington, or deviated in some material way from otherwise ideatical units in the same product line. P1LAN~'S JXCST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 13 LAW OFRCES BENNETT BGELOW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Suite 1900 Seattie, Washington T:(206) F: Qw

14 13.3 The trailer was not reasonably safe in construction under RCW (2) because the trailer was unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by an ordinary user U-Haul of Washington supplied a product that was not reasonably safe in construction at the time the product left U-Haul of Washington's control The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff Maria Federici. XN. ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-HAUL OF WASHNGTON, STRCT LABLTY FOR FALURE TO PROVDE ADEOUATE WARNNGS OR RTSTRUCTONS WTH THE PRODUCT 14.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs. through 13.5 above as if stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: 14.2 Under RCW (1)(b), the trailer was not reasonably safe because adequate warningi or instructions were not provided with the bailer because, at the time of manufacture, the likelihood that the trailer would cause injury or damage similar to that claimed by Plaintiff Maria Federici, and the seriousness of such injury or damage, rendered the warnings or instructions of U-Haul of Washington inadequate, and U-Haul of Washington could have provided adequate warnings or instructions Under RCW (1)(b), the trailer was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided with the trailer because the trailer is unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary user The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff Maria Federici. - PLANTFF'S FXST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 14 LAW OFFCES RENNGTT BGELOW & LEEDOM, PS Seventh Avenue, Suite 1900 Seaale, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

15 W. TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-HAUL OP WASHNGTON, NEGLlGENT FALURE TO PROVDE ADEQUATE WARNNGS AFTER THE PRODUCT WAS MANUFACTURED 15.1 Plaintiff realeges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 14.4 above as if stated fuly herein, and Mer alleges as follows: 15.2 Under RCW (1)(~), the kailer was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided after the trailer was manufactured because U-Haul of Washington eamed, or a reasonably prudent manufacturer should have learned, about a danger connected with the trailer after it was manufactured Under RCW (1)(c), U-Haul of Washington had a duty to act with regard to issuing warnings or instructions concerning the danger in the manner that a reasonably prudent manufacturer would act in the same or similar circumstances The trailer was unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by an ordinary user The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff Maria Federici. XV. TSRTE'ENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-HAUL OF WASRNGTON, NEGLGENT F'ALURJE TO WARN 16.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 tbrough 15.5 above as if stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: 16.2 As a manufacturer or supplier of products made available for lease to customers of U-Haul dealers, U-Haul of Washington had a duty to exercise reasonable care to warn customers of U-Haul dealers of dangers associated with the products leased fi-om U-Haul PLANm'S FRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 15 LAW OFFCES BENNElT BGnOW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Suite 1900 Seattle, Washington T: (206) E (206)

16 16.3 U-Haul of Washington knew or had reason to know that the trailer was or was likely to be dangerous for the use for which it was supplied U-Haul of Washington had no reason to believe that those for whose use the trailer was supplied would realize its dangerous condition U-Haul of Washington failed to exercise reasonable care to inform James Hefley of the dangerous condition of the trailer or of the facts which would make it Likely to be dangerous The failure of U-Haul of Washington to exercise reasonable care to warn James Hefley of the dangerous condition of the trailer or of the facts which would make it likely to be dangerous proxinlately caused injury to Plaintiff Maria Federici Had James Hefley been wamed by U-Haul of Washingkon of the dangerous condition of the trailer or of the facts which would make it likely to be dangerous, he would have secured the load that was launched fiom the trailer and not proximately caused injury to Plaintiff Maria Federici. XV. FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-'KAU, OF WASKNGTON, NEGLGENT LEASE OF CHATTEL FOR MMEDlATlE USE 17.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 16.7 above as if stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: 17.2 As a manufacturer or supplier of products made available for lease to customers af U-Haul dealers, U-Haul of Washington had a duty to exercise reasonable care to make the trailer safe for immediate use or to disclose the trailer's actual condition to customers. PLANTFF'S FRST 4MExDED COMPLANT Page 16 LAW OFFlCES BENNFlT BGELOW & LFEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Suite 1900 Seattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

17 17.3 U-Haul of Washington knew or should have known that James Hefley would immediately use the trailer U-Haul of Washington failed to exercise reasonable care to rnake the trailer safe for imnediate use or to disclose the trailer's actual condition to James Hefley The negigence of U-Haul of Washington in failing to exercise reasonable care to make the trailer safe for immediate use or to disclose the trailer's actual condition to James Hefley proxirnatey caused injury to Plaintiff Maria Federici. XV. FFTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-HAUL OF WASHNGTON, NEGLGENT PROVSON OF CHATTEL UNLKELY TO BE MADE SAFE FOR USE 18.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 17.5 above as if stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: 18.2 As a manuhcturer or supplier of products made available for lease to customers of U-Haul dealers, U-Haul of Washington had a duty to exercise reasonable care not to provide for lease to customers chattels that were unlikely to be made safe for use U-Haul of Washington supplied the trailer to James Hefley knowing or having reason to know that the trailer was unlikely to be made reasonably safe before being put to a use which U-Haul of Washington should expect it to be put James Hefley was ignorant of the dangerous character of the trailer The negligence of U-Haul of Washington in supplying the trailer for lease to James Hefley, knowing or having reason to know that the trailer was unlikely to be made reasonably safe before James Hefley put it to a use which U-Haul of Washington should expect it to be put, proximately caused injury to?plaintiff Maria Federici. PLGNrnF'S r n T AMENDED COlWLANT Page 17 LAW OFECES BENNX BGELOW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avarue, Suite 1900 Scattle, Washiogton T:(206) F: (206)

18 AXE. SXTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: U-HAUL OF WASHNGTON, NEGLGEPaT ENTRUSTMEhT 19.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 18.5 above as if stated fully herein, and further alleges as follows: 19.2 As a inanufacturer or supplier of products made available for lease to customers of U-Haul dealers, U-Haul of Washington andlor its actual or apparent agents exercised control over the trailer and was responsible for the use of the trailer for purposes of negligent entrustment U-Haul of Washington andlor its actual or apparent agents knew, or should have known in the exercise of ordinary care, that James Hefley at the time of the rental transaction was reckless, heedless, or incompetent The negligence of U-Haul of Washington andlor its actual or apparent agents in entrusting the trailer to James Hefley, knowing or having reason to know that James Hefley at the time of the rental transaction was reckless, heedless, or incompetent, proximately caused injury to 'Plaintiff Maria Federici. XX. SEVENTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: CAPRON, STRCT LABTLTY FOR PRODUCT NOT REASONABLY SA;FE AS DESGrnD 20.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 ~ o u & 19.4 above as if1 stated Nly herein, and further alleges as follows: 20.2 Capron is a product seller under RCW O(1) because it is engaged in the business of leasing products. PLANTFF'S FRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 18 LAW OFFCES BE- BGELOW 8; LEEDOM, PS Seventh Averme, Suite 1900 Scattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

19 20.3 Capron has the liability of a manufacturer under RCW et seq. because Capron's leasing activities are sufficiently great to justifl hoding it accountable for the acts of a manufacturer The trailer was not reasonably safe as designed under RCW (1)(a) because, at the time of manufacture, the likelihood that the trailer would cause injury or damage 1 sirndar to that claimed by Plaintiff Maria Federici, and the seriousness of such injury or damage, outweighed the burden on Capron to design a trailer that would have prevented the injury or damage and outweighed the adverse effect that an alternative design that was practical and feasible would have on the usefulness of the trailer The trailer was not reasonably safe as designed under RCW (1)(a) because the trailer was unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by an ordinary user The trailer was not reasonaby safe as designed at the time the trailer left Capron's control The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff Maria Federici. XX. EGETEENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: CAPRON, STRCT L-4BKmV DEFECT T!V CQESTR,UCD.CN 21.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1. through 20.7 above as if stated klly herein, and Mer alleges as follows: 21.2 The trailer was not reasonably safe in construction under RCW (2) because, when the trailer left the control of Capron, the trailer deviated in some material way PrnrnP'S FlRST NMENDED COMPLANT Page 19 LAW OFFCES BENNElT BGELOW & LEEDOM, P.S Seventh Avenue, Smte 1900 Seattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

20 &om the design specifications or performance standards of Capron, or deviated in some illaterial way fiom otherwise identical units in the same product line The trailer was not reasonably safe in construction wder RCW (2) because the trailer was unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by an ordinary user Capron supplied a product that was not reasonably safe in construction at the time the product lefi Capron's control The unsafe condition of the trailer was a proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff Maria Federici. XXD[. NNETEENTH CAUSE OF ACTON: CAPRON, STRCT LABLXTY FOR FALURE TO PROVDE ADEOUATE WARNNGS OR NSTRUCTONS WTH TBE PRODUCT 22.1 Plaintiff realleges the facts set forth in paragraphs 1.1 through 21-5 above as if stated fdly herein, and M e r alleges as follows: 22.2 Under RON the trailer was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided with the trailer because, at the time of manufacture, the Likelihood that the trailer would cause injury or damage similar to that claimed by Plaintiff Maria Federici, and the seriousness of such injury or damage, rendered the warnings or instructions of Capron inadequate, and Capron could have provided adequate warnings or instructions Under RCW the trailer was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided with the trailer because the trailer was unsafe to an extent beyond that which would be contemplated by the ordinary user. PLANm'S FRST AMENDED COMPLANT Page 20 LAW OFFCES BENNElT BGELOW & LEEWM, P.S. 700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, Washington T: (206) F: (206)

Compulsory Arbitration

Compulsory Arbitration Local Rule 1301 Scope. Compulsory Arbitration Local Rule 1301 Scope. (1) The following civil actions shall first be submitted to and heard by a Board of Arbitrators: (a) (b) (c) (d) Civil actions, proceedings

More information

Counsel must be fully familiar with the Uniform Civil Rules for the Supreme Court 22 NYCRR Part 202.

Counsel must be fully familiar with the Uniform Civil Rules for the Supreme Court 22 NYCRR Part 202. JUSTICE GERALD E. LOEHR, J.S.C. Rockland County Supreme Court 1 South Main Street New City, New York 10956 Courtroom 1 Tel: (845) 483-8343 Fax: (845) 708-7236 Staff Bruce J. Pearl, Principal Law Secretary

More information

FILED 15 JUL 27 AM 9:22

FILED 15 JUL 27 AM 9:22 FILED JUL AM : KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CLERK E-FILED CASE NUMBER: --- KNT JUDITH JORGENSEN, vs. SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY Plaintiff, JAMES WONG and TYRA WONG, husband and wife creating

More information

Getting a Trial Date in Cowlitz County

Getting a Trial Date in Cowlitz County 9950EN 6/2015 Getting a Trial Date in Cowlitz County Is this publication for me? Yes, if You have a civil case in Cowlitz County Superior Court AND The respondent/defendant in the case has filed a response

More information

SMALL CLAIMS RULES. (d) Record of Proceedings. A record shall be made of all small claims court proceedings.

SMALL CLAIMS RULES. (d) Record of Proceedings. A record shall be made of all small claims court proceedings. SMALL CLAIMS RULES Rule 501. Scope and Purpose (a) How Known and Cited. These rules for the small claims division for the county court are additions to C.R.C.P. and shall be known and cited as the Colorado

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: MIDDLESEX COUNTY DOCKET NO. L- IN RE: MIDDLESEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION CIVIL ACTION ASBESTOS LITIGATION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: MIDDLESEX COUNTY DOCKET NO. L- IN RE: MIDDLESEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION CIVIL ACTION ASBESTOS LITIGATION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: MIDDLESEX COUNTY DOCKET NO. L- IN RE: MIDDLESEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION CIVIL ACTION ASBESTOS LITIGATION GENERAL ORDER I. COMPLAINTS A. All complaints must: 1. Include

More information

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE In the Matter of a ) Uniform Pretrial Order ) ) Administrative Order 3AO-03-04 (Amended) UNIFORM PRETRIAL ORDER In order

More information

Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION

Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION STANDING ORDER FOR MAGISTRATE JUDGE KANDIS A. WESTMORE (Revised

More information

JUSTICE COURT # 2 GRAHAM COUNTY STATE OF ARIZONA P.O. BOX 1159, 136 WEST CENTER STREET, PIMA AZ 85543 PHONE (928) 485-2771 FAX (928) 485-9961

JUSTICE COURT # 2 GRAHAM COUNTY STATE OF ARIZONA P.O. BOX 1159, 136 WEST CENTER STREET, PIMA AZ 85543 PHONE (928) 485-2771 FAX (928) 485-9961 JUSTICE COURT # 2 GRAHAM COUNTY STATE OF ARIZONA P.O. BOX 1159, 136 WEST CENTER STREET, PIMA AZ 85543 PHONE (928) 485-2771 FAX (928) 485-9961 SMALL CLAIMS INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING ***EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1,

More information

Civil Suits: The Process

Civil Suits: The Process Jurisdictional Limits The justice courts have exclusive jurisdiction or the authority to hear all civil actions when the amount involved, exclusive of interest, costs and awarded attorney fees when authorized

More information

The Judges of the Fulton Superior Court hereby create a "Business Case Division" (hereinafter referred to as the "Division").

The Judges of the Fulton Superior Court hereby create a Business Case Division (hereinafter referred to as the Division). SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA Atlanta October 11, 2012 The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to adjournment. The following order was passed: It is ordered that Paragraph 5 of Atlanta Judicial Circuit Rule

More information

CIRCUIT COURT. Uncontested Divorce Procedures Manual

CIRCUIT COURT. Uncontested Divorce Procedures Manual CIRCUIT COURT Uncontested Divorce Procedures Manual Adopted November 1, 2004. Last Revision Date: August 10, 2015 Notice to party proceeding pro se (without an attorney) If you are representing yourself

More information

Personal Injury Litigation

Personal Injury Litigation Personal Injury Litigation The Anatomy of a New York Personal Injury Lawsuit An ebook by Stuart DiMartini, Esq. 1325 Sixth Avenue, 27 th Floor New York, NY 10019 212-5181532 dimartinilaw.com Introduction

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA. CASE NO.: 16- DIVISION: CV- vs. Plaintiff, Defendant. ORDER SETTING CASE FOR JURY TRIAL AND PRETRIAL CONFERENCE AND REQUIRING

More information

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN The following provisions apply to civil cases filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana that are not exempt from filing

More information

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES Rule Effective Chapter 1. Civil Cases over $25,000 300. Renumbered as Rule 359 07/01/09 301. Classification 07/01/09 302. Renumbered as Rule 361 07/01/09 303. All-Purpose Assignment

More information

2014 IL App (1st) 130250-U. No. 1-13-0250 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2014 IL App (1st) 130250-U. No. 1-13-0250 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2014 IL App (1st) 130250-U FIFTH DIVISION September 12, 2014 No. 1-13-0250 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited

More information

RULE 1. ASSIGNMENT OF CASES

RULE 1. ASSIGNMENT OF CASES LOCAL RULES FOR FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI [Renumbered and codified by order of the Supreme Court effective May 18, 2006; amended effective April 23, 2009.] RULE 1. ASSIGNMENT OF CASES

More information

AN ACT. To amend chapter 383, RSMo, by adding thereto thirteen new sections relating to the Missouri health care arbitration act.

AN ACT. To amend chapter 383, RSMo, by adding thereto thirteen new sections relating to the Missouri health care arbitration act. 3721L.01I AN ACT To amend chapter 383, RSMo, by adding thereto thirteen new sections relating to the Missouri health care arbitration act. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI,

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY PROBATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY PROBATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY PROBATE DIVISION Trial/Hearing Rules for Probate Judge: Mary Fingal Schulte, Supervising Judge Judge: Gerald Johnston Judge: Randall Sherman Clerks: Dept. L72, Mary Torrez

More information

PREVIEW. 1. The following form may be used to file a personal injury lawsuit.

PREVIEW. 1. The following form may be used to file a personal injury lawsuit. Information or instructions: Plaintiff's original petition-auto accident 1. The following form may be used to file a personal injury lawsuit. 2. It assumes several plaintiffs were rear-ended by an employee

More information

IN THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, SALT LAKE COUNTY STATE OF UTAH. Case No. : Judge:

IN THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, SALT LAKE COUNTY STATE OF UTAH. Case No. : Judge: Alan W. Mortensen (6616) DEWSNUP, KING & OLSEN 36 South State Street, Ste. 2400 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Telephone (801) 533-0400 Facsimile (801) 363-4218 Attorneys for Plaintiffs IN THE THIRD JUDICIAL

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case :-cv-000-tor Document Filed 0/0/ 0 John T. John, WSBA # Daniel J. Oates, WSBA # 0 Alaskan Way, Suite 00 Seattle, Washington Telephone: ( -00 Email: jjohn@grahamdunn.com doates@grahamdunn.com Attorney

More information

CIVIL TRIAL RULES. of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS. Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS. Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases...

CIVIL TRIAL RULES. of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS. Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS. Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases... CIVIL TRIAL RULES of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS Addendum to Local Rules Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases...2 Rule 1.11 Annual Calendar...3

More information

Attorney for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES COUNTY CENTRAL DISTRICT STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE

Attorney for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES COUNTY CENTRAL DISTRICT STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE VACHON LAW FIRM Michael R. Vachon, Esq. (SBN ) 0 Via Del Campo, Suite San Diego, California Tel.: () -0 Fax: () - Attorney for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES COUNTY CENTRAL

More information

INFORMATION FOR FILING AND DEFENDING A CIVIL CASE IN JUSTICE COURT

INFORMATION FOR FILING AND DEFENDING A CIVIL CASE IN JUSTICE COURT PINAL COUNTY Apache Junction Justice Court Eloy Justice Court Superior/Kearny Justice Court Maricopa/Stanfield Justice Court JUSTICE COURTS Casa Grande Justice Court Florence/Coolidge Justice Court Mammoth/San

More information

THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS: the Complaint which is herewith served upon you within twenty (20) days after the service of

THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS: the Complaint which is herewith served upon you within twenty (20) days after the service of STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: Personal Injury ERIC GUSTAFSON and JENNIFER GUSTAFSON, Individually and as parents and natural guardians for CALLIE

More information

CASE NO.: CIVIL DIVISION COMPLAINT. through undersigned counsel, and hereby sues Defendant, Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., a Florida GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

CASE NO.: CIVIL DIVISION COMPLAINT. through undersigned counsel, and hereby sues Defendant, Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., a Florida GENERAL ALLEGATIONS IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, vs. Plaintiff, CASE NO.: CIVIL DIVISION WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC., Defendant, / COMPLAINT COMES NOW Plaintiff,,

More information

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES Rule Effective Chapter 1. Civil Cases over $25,000 300. Renumbered as Rule 359 07/01/09 301. Classification 07/01/09 302. Renumbered as Rule 361 07/01/09 303. All-Purpose Assignment

More information

IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT, PREBLE COUNTY, OHIO

IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT, PREBLE COUNTY, OHIO IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT, PREBLE COUNTY, OHIO IN THE MATTER OF THE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LOCAL RULES: ENTRY The following local rules are adopted to govern the practice and procedures of this Court, subject

More information

S.B. 88 126th General Assembly (As Introduced)

S.B. 88 126th General Assembly (As Introduced) Elizabeth Dominic Bill Analysis Legislative Service Commission S.B. 88 126th General Assembly (As Introduced) Sens. Coughlin, Goodman BILL SUMMARY Requires the Superintendent of Insurance to establish

More information

COMPLAINT. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF] hereby sues the Defendants, [DEFENDANT #1], [DEFENDANT INTRODUCTION

COMPLAINT. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF] hereby sues the Defendants, [DEFENDANT #1], [DEFENDANT INTRODUCTION Form 2:40-2 Complaint Negligence, Motor Vehicle IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ## JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR [COUNTY], FLORIDA [PLAINTIFF], Plaintiff, CASE NO.: ##-##### ## ## GENERAL JURISDICTION vs. [DEFENDANT

More information

SUMMARY OF CHANGES COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES

SUMMARY OF CHANGES COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES SUMMARY OF CHANGES COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES Amended and Effective October 1, 2013 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES: 1. Mediation R-9. Mediation: Mediation is increasingly relied upon and is an accepted part of

More information

w' Floor - against - SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK Index No.: Date Filed: TAMARA VANDERHYDEN, Plaintiff,

w' Floor - against - SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK Index No.: Date Filed: TAMARA VANDERHYDEN, Plaintiff, SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK TAMARA VANDERHYDEN, - against - Plaintiff, PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF NEW YORK CITY, BETH ISRAEL MEDICAL CENTER, GERALD ZUPNICK, M.D., MAURE JACQUELINE

More information

Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES

Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES Chapter 337-A: PROTECTION FROM HARASSMENT Table of Contents Part 12. HUMAN RIGHTS... Section 4651. DEFINITIONS... 3 Section 4652. FILING OF COMPLAINT; JURISDICTION...

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS M.R. 3140 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Order entered February 16, 2011. (Deleted material is struck through and new material is underscored.) Effective immediately, Supreme Court Rules

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1 0 1 MARC D. ADELMAN Attorney at Law State Bar No. Liberty Station Historic Decatur Road, Suite 00 San Diego, CA - (1) -0 Phone (1) -0 Fax Email: AdelmanMD@aol.com Attorney for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR THURSTON COUNTY

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR THURSTON COUNTY THE HONORABLE CAROL MURPHY 1 1 1 1 1 SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR THURSTON COUNTY TARVA LEE, ) ) No: --00- Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) COMPLAINT FOR BREACH OF ) CONTRACT, BAD FAITH, FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY

More information

PREVIEW PLEASE DO NOT COPY THIS DOCUMENT THANK YOU. LegalFormsForTexas.Com

PREVIEW PLEASE DO NOT COPY THIS DOCUMENT THANK YOU. LegalFormsForTexas.Com Form: Plaintiff's original petition-wrongful Death [Name], PLAINTIFF vs. [Name], DEFENDANT [ IN THE [Type of Court] COURT [Court number] PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION 1. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN 1.1 Plaintiff

More information

Los Angeles Superior Court Limited Jurisdiction Department 77

Los Angeles Superior Court Limited Jurisdiction Department 77 Los Angeles Superior Court Limited Jurisdiction Department 77 Frequently Asked Questions PLEASE NOTE: Department 77 has recently added additional available hearing dates to the Court Reservation System

More information

AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. KIM WALLANT and LOUIS BOREK, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, vs. Plaintiffs, FREEDOM

More information

Complaint as permitted by Case Management Order # 4 and Implementing Order PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Complaint as permitted by Case Management Order # 4 and Implementing Order PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE [INSERT NAME], Plaintiff(s) vs. HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS CORPORATION, a New Jersey Corporation, d/b/a STRYKER ORTHOPAEDICS, JILL DOE MANUFACTURERS (1-10), JACK DOE WHOLESALERS (1-10), JAKE DOE SELLERS (1-10),

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. DHL EXPRESS (USA), Inc. ( DHL ) by its attorneys, Bauer Moynihan & Johnson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. DHL EXPRESS (USA), Inc. ( DHL ) by its attorneys, Bauer Moynihan & Johnson THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 1 1 MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. DHL EXPRESS (USA), Inc., Defendant / Third-Party Plaintiff.

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING THIS NOTICE MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING THIS NOTICE MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING MYSPINE, PS, a Washington professional services corporation; BODY RECOVERY CLINIC LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company; and YAROSLAV KUTSY, Plaintiffs,

More information

FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION AND COLLECTIVE COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION AND COLLECTIVE COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND District Court, Denver County, Colorado 1437 Bannock Street Denver, Colorado 80202 GUILLERMO ARTEAGA-GOMEZ, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, DATE FILED: January 22, 2015 6:02

More information

CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA. ANSWER ) Defendant. ) )

CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA. ANSWER ) Defendant. ) ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANS (NAME) (ADDRESS) (CITY, STATE, ZIP) (TELEPHONE) Defendant Pro Se DISTRICT COURT CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA ) ) Case No.: Plaintiff,

More information

PRACTICE GUIDELINES MEMORANDUM. RE: Sample Bankruptcy Motions and Orders for Personal Injury Practitioners and Trustees

PRACTICE GUIDELINES MEMORANDUM. RE: Sample Bankruptcy Motions and Orders for Personal Injury Practitioners and Trustees PRACTICE GUIDELINES MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Attorneys Practicing Before Me And Other Interested Persons C. Timothy Corcoran, III United States Bankruptcy Judge DATE: January 3, 2000 1 RE: Sample Bankruptcy

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Fernando F. Chavez, Esq. SBN 0 CHAVEZ LAW GROUP 00 West Beverly Blvd., Montebello, Ca 00 Phone: () 00-0, Facsimile: (0) 1-01 E-mail: ffchavez0@gmail.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE

More information

JUSTICE LINDA S. JAMIESON COMMERCIAL DIVISION RULES

JUSTICE LINDA S. JAMIESON COMMERCIAL DIVISION RULES JUSTICE LINDA S. JAMIESON COMMERCIAL DIVISION RULES Supreme Court of the State of New York Westchester County Courthouse 111 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard White Plains, New York 10601 Courtroom

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS Misc. Docket No. 93-0141L APPROVAL OF LOCAL RULES OF CIVIL TRIAL OF THE 241ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF SMITH COUNTY ORDERED: Pursuant to Rule 3a of the Texas Rules of Civil

More information

[Additional Counsel Appear on Signature Page] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

[Additional Counsel Appear on Signature Page] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Case :0-cv-00-LRS Document - Filed // 0 Toby J. Marshall, WSBA # Erika L. Nusser, WSBA #0 Attorneys for the Plaintiffs Telephone: () -0 Facsimile: () 0- Email: tmarshall@tmdwlaw.com Email: enusser@tmdwlaw.com

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION COMPLAINT

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION COMPLAINT IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION Plaintiff, CASE NUMBER: JUDGE: vs. Defendant. / COMPLAINT COMES NOW, Plaintiff,, and hereby sues

More information

vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff JAMES SCHAIRER, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby sues

vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff JAMES SCHAIRER, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby sues IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE th 16 JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION CASE NO. JAMES SCHAIRER, individually, Plaintiff, vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PAUL KERCHER,

More information

14-05313-16 CAUSE NO. JULIE TORBERT, as next friend of IN THE DISTRICT COURT PHILIP ORMSTON V. DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS

14-05313-16 CAUSE NO. JULIE TORBERT, as next friend of IN THE DISTRICT COURT PHILIP ORMSTON V. DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS 14-05313-16 CAUSE NO. FILED: 7/15/2014 1:32:23 PM SHERRI ADELSTEIN Denton County District Clerk By: Heather Goheen, Deputy JULIE TORBERT, as next friend of IN THE DISTRICT COURT PHILIP ORMSTON Plaintiff

More information

No. ) ) COMES NOW the plaintiff by and through her attorney, Roger K. Anderson, and states her I. PARTIES AND JURISDICTION

No. ) ) COMES NOW the plaintiff by and through her attorney, Roger K. Anderson, and states her I. PARTIES AND JURISDICTION FILED 1 MAY 1 AM :0 1 KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CLERK E-FILED CASE NUMBER: 1--8-1 SEA 3 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY SANDRA S. NOREEN, Plaintiff, vs. 1 MICHAEL W. BUGNI, individually

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PASCO AND PINELLAS COUNTIES, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2013-064 PA/PI-CIR

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PASCO AND PINELLAS COUNTIES, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2013-064 PA/PI-CIR IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PASCO AND PINELLAS COUNTIES, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2013-064 PA/PI-CIR RE: PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCES Rule 1.200(c) of the Florida Rules of

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER RELIEF

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD CIRCUIT STATE OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER RELIEF ROBERT D.S. KIM A Law Corporation Attorney At Law ROBERT D.S. KIM 4255-0 77-6400 Nalani Street, Suite A-1 Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 Telephone (808 329-6611 Attorney for Plaintiffs IN THE CIRCUIT COURT

More information

FILED THE HONORABLE MARY YU HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

FILED THE HONORABLE MARY YU HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING FILED AUG PM 1: THE HONORABLE MARY YU HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER KING COUNTY, SUPERIOR COURT CLERK E-FILED CASE NUMBER: ---1 SEA 1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF

More information

SMALL CLAIMS COURT INFORMATION

SMALL CLAIMS COURT INFORMATION Clark County District Court SMALL CLAIMS COURT INFORMATION INTRODUCTION The Small Claims Department of District Court allows a person or business with a legal dispute to sue without hiring an attorney.

More information

Case3:12-cv-05980-CRB Document265 Filed07/20/15 Page2 of 12

Case3:12-cv-05980-CRB Document265 Filed07/20/15 Page2 of 12 Case:-cv-00-CRB Document Filed0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 0 IN RE HP SECURITIES LITIGATION, This Document Relates To: All Actions MASTER

More information

Small Claims: The Process in Detail

Small Claims: The Process in Detail What is a small claims division? Every justice court in Arizona has a small claims division to provide an inexpensive and speedy method for resolving most civil disputes that do not exceed $2,500. All

More information

DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE RECOMMENDED CASE HANDLING GUIDELINES FOR INSURERS

DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE RECOMMENDED CASE HANDLING GUIDELINES FOR INSURERS DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE RECOMMENDED CASE HANDLING GUIDELINES FOR INSURERS I. PREFACE Philosophy [Insurer] expects to work with the Firm and the insured to achieve the best result for the insured in

More information

Case 2:12-cv-01495-TSZ Document 4 Filed 09/11/12 Page 2 of 11. metal insert, 36 mm ID, 52 mm OD, lot #1950021; a 10.5 mm small stature AML stem, lot

Case 2:12-cv-01495-TSZ Document 4 Filed 09/11/12 Page 2 of 11. metal insert, 36 mm ID, 52 mm OD, lot #1950021; a 10.5 mm small stature AML stem, lot Case :-cv-0-tsz Document Filed 0// Page of Hon. Thomas S. Zilly UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE JAMES A. DOERTY, vs. Plaintiff, JOHNSON & JOHNSON, DEPUY, INC., and

More information

INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT

INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT This Independent Contractor Agreement ( Agreement ) is entered between Nordstrom, Inc. ( Nordstrom ), with a business address at 1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1000, Seattle,

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO - CENTRAL DIVISION. Plaintifl. Defendants.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO - CENTRAL DIVISION. Plaintifl. Defendants. 1 EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of California CATHERINE Z. YSRAEL Supervising Deputy Attorney General JUDITH FIORENTINI Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 1 West A Street, Suite 10 San Diego,

More information

PART 15--ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS UNDER FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

PART 15--ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS UNDER FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT Note: This document contains FAR Part 15 including Amendment 15-4 published in the Federal Register on September 4, 1997. PART 15--ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS UNDER FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT Subpart A--General

More information

Any civil action exempt from arbitration by action of a presiding judge under ORS 36.405.

Any civil action exempt from arbitration by action of a presiding judge under ORS 36.405. CHAPTER 13 Arbitration 13.010 APPLICATION OF CHAPTER (1) This UTCR chapter applies to arbitration under ORS 36.400 to 36.425 and Acts amendatory thereof but, except as therein provided, does not apply

More information

POST-DECREE OR POST-FINAL ORDERS

POST-DECREE OR POST-FINAL ORDERS District Court El Paso County, Colorado Court Address: 270 S. Tejon, PO Box 2980, Colorado Springs, CO 80901 (719) 448-7700 Petitioner: COURT USE ONLY Case Number: Respondent / Co-Petitioner: DOMESTIC

More information

PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF MANDATORY CLASS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF MANDATORY CLASS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JANE DOE NO. 1, JANE ROE NO. 1, JANE ROE NO.2, and JANE ROE NO. 3 Plaintiffs, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT v. FOR THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL, JOHNS HOPKINS COMMUNITY PHYSICIANS, and JOHNS HOPKINS HEALTH SYSTEM

More information

SELECT SERVICES FLAT FEE REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT page 1 of 8

SELECT SERVICES FLAT FEE REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT page 1 of 8 Utah Family Law, LC Tel. No. 801-466-9277 E-mail: eric@divorceutah.com Attorney Eric K. Johnson - Attorney Russell W. Hartvigsen Mail: 2666 South 2000 East, Suite 101 Salt Lake City Utah 84109 REMEMBER:

More information

STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS

STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS NORTH CAROLINA TRIAL JUDGES BENCH BOOK, SUPERIOR COURT, VOL. 2 (Civil), Structured Settlements, at pp. 4-7 (3d ed.) (Institute of Government 1999) A. THE APPROVAL HEARING 1. Plaintiff

More information

HON. ELAINE SLOBOD, J.S.C. Orange County Courthouse 255-285 Main Street Goshen, New York 10924

HON. ELAINE SLOBOD, J.S.C. Orange County Courthouse 255-285 Main Street Goshen, New York 10924 HON. ELAINE SLOBOD, J.S.C. Orange County Courthouse 255-285 Main Street Goshen, New York 10924 PART CLERK: Christopher J. Beck (845) 476-3468 LAW CLERK: Bruce Muldoon (845) 476-3461 SECRETARY: Jocelyn

More information

Managing Jones Act Personal Injury Litigation The Vessel Owner s Perspective. Lawrence R. DeMarcay, III

Managing Jones Act Personal Injury Litigation The Vessel Owner s Perspective. Lawrence R. DeMarcay, III Managing Jones Act Personal Injury Litigation The Vessel Owner s Perspective by Lawrence R. DeMarcay, III Presented to the Offshore Marine Services Association / Loyola College of Law Industry Seminar

More information

Information or instructions: Defendant s Cross-claims and counterclaims PREVIEW

Information or instructions: Defendant s Cross-claims and counterclaims PREVIEW Information or instructions: Defendant s Cross-claims and counterclaims 1. The purpose of counterclaims and cross-actions is to join persons and actions, as permitted by TRCP 39, 40, 41, 49, 50, and 51,

More information

PERSONAL INJURY COURTS (DEPTS. 91, 92, 93 AND 97) FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

PERSONAL INJURY COURTS (DEPTS. 91, 92, 93 AND 97) FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS PERSONAL INJURY COURTS (DEPTS. 91, 92, 93 AND 97) FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS TO UNDERSTAND PROCEDURES IN THE PERSONAL INJURY (PI) COURTS, PLEASE CAREFULLY REVIEW THE LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT S (LASC

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES John A. Clarke, Executive Oacer/Clerk * Deputy SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES IN RE LAOSD ASBESTOS LITIGATION JCCP CASE NO. 4674 ORDER AUTHORIZING ELECTRONIC SERVICE

More information

CIRCUIT COURT. Uncontested Divorce Procedures Manual

CIRCUIT COURT. Uncontested Divorce Procedures Manual CIRCUIT COURT Uncontested Divorce Procedures Manual Adopted November 1, 2004. Last Revision: April 24, 2013 Uncontested Divorce Procedures Procedure 1. Requirements for divorce to be uncontested and appropriate

More information

A Practical Summary of the New Supreme Court Civil Rules for Clark Wilson LLP Insurance Clients

A Practical Summary of the New Supreme Court Civil Rules for Clark Wilson LLP Insurance Clients A Practical Summary of the New Supreme Court Civil Rules for Clark Wilson LLP Insurance Clients by: Jennifer Loeb Clark Wilson LLP tel. 604.891.7766 jrl@cwilson.com Edited by: Larry Munn Clark Wilson LLP

More information

GRAY, L.L.C. 760 ROUTE 10 WEST, SUITE 203 WHIPPANY, NEW JERSEY 07981 PH: 973-240-7313 F: 973-240-7316 Attorneys for Plaintiff Henry Kent

GRAY, L.L.C. 760 ROUTE 10 WEST, SUITE 203 WHIPPANY, NEW JERSEY 07981 PH: 973-240-7313 F: 973-240-7316 Attorneys for Plaintiff Henry Kent POMPELIO, FOREMAN & GRAY, L.L.C. 760 ROUTE 10 WEST, SUITE 203 WHIPPANY, NEW JERSEY 07981 PH: 973-240-7313 F: 973-240-7316 Attorneys for Plaintiff Henry Kent HENRY KENT, vs. Plaintiff, SMILES II RESTAURANT,

More information

SPECIAL CIVIL A GUIDE TO THE COURT

SPECIAL CIVIL A GUIDE TO THE COURT NEW JERSEY JUDICIARY SPECIAL CIVIL A GUIDE TO THE COURT Superior Court of New Jersey Law Division Special Civil Part Special Civil A Guide to the Court page 1 Special Civil is a court of limited jurisdiction

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION If you were injured or provided treatment for an injury and filed a claim under your Allstate Med Pay coverage, and were compensated in an amount

More information

CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT RULES - for - THE DISTRICT COURT DIVISION of THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Guilford County, North Carolina

CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT RULES - for - THE DISTRICT COURT DIVISION of THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Guilford County, North Carolina - for - THE of THE Guilford County, North Carolina - for - THE of THE Guilford County, North Carolina ----------TABLE OF CONTENTS---------- RULE 1 SCOPE & PURPOSE.....................................

More information

COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND. of police reports in bad faith. Plaintiff claims that Defendants acted willfully, wantonly and in

COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND. of police reports in bad faith. Plaintiff claims that Defendants acted willfully, wantonly and in Weld County, Colorado, District Court, 901 9 th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 970.351.7300 Plaintiff: vs. Defendants: JENNIFER BELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, BRADLEY PETROLEUM,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA DOMESTIC RELATIONS PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 140

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA DOMESTIC RELATIONS PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 140 SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA DOMESTIC RELATIONS PROCEDURAL RULES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 140 CHAPTER 1950. ACTIONS PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTION OF VICTIMS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION ACT Rule 1951.

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI JANE DOE, Plaintiff, vs. Case Number 1131-********* MISSOURI COMPANY, and INDIANA COMPANY Defendants. FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR DAMAGES COMES NOW Plaintiff,

More information

Part VIII RULES GOVERNING PRACTICE IN THE TAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part VIII RULES GOVERNING PRACTICE IN THE TAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX C - New Jersey Tax Court Rules Part VIII RULES GOVERNING PRACTICE IN THE TAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY Rule 8:1. Rule 8:2. Rule 8:3. Rule 8:4. TABLE OF CONTENTS Scope: Applicability Review Jurisdiction

More information

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW Rule Effective 700. Subject Matter of the Family Law Court 07/01/2011 700.5 Attorneys and Self Represented Parties 07/01/2011 700.6 Family Law Filings 01/01/2012 701. Assignment of

More information

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION INFORMATION

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION INFORMATION SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION INFORMATION PARTIES The individual or corporation who initiates an action is known as the plaintiff. The individual or corporation against whom an action is brought is known as the

More information

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and

More information

Rule 6 Adopted at a joint meeting of the District and County Court at Law Judges of Webb County on December 2, 2009

Rule 6 Adopted at a joint meeting of the District and County Court at Law Judges of Webb County on December 2, 2009 Rule 6 Adopted at a joint meeting of the District and County Court at Law Judges of Webb County on December 2, 2009 Committee Members Pete Garza Hugo Martinez Richard Gonzalez Fernando Sanchez Eduardo

More information

Hon. Maria S. Vazquez-Doles, J.S.C. Orange County Supreme Court 285 Main Street Goshen, NY 10924. Part Rules (Effective September 29, 2014)

Hon. Maria S. Vazquez-Doles, J.S.C. Orange County Supreme Court 285 Main Street Goshen, NY 10924. Part Rules (Effective September 29, 2014) Law Clerk: Jane Harrington Secretary: Allison Cappella Part Clerk: Trisha Rittenhouse Phone: (845)476-3449 Fax: (845) 476-3684 APPEARANCES Hon. Maria S. Vazquez-Doles, J.S.C. Orange County Supreme Court

More information

Rule 6. Civil Practice

Rule 6. Civil Practice Page 1 Rule 6. Civil Practice 6.01 Pretrial procedure. A pretrial conference may be ordered by the judge to whom a civil case is assigned. Upon notice of the scheduling of a pretrial conference it shall

More information

Filing # 22009228 Electronically Filed 12/29/2014 03:48:06 PM

Filing # 22009228 Electronically Filed 12/29/2014 03:48:06 PM Filing # 22009228 Electronically Filed 12/29/2014 03:48:06 PM PENELOPE BELVOIR, as Executor de son Tort for the Pending Estate of Robert Belvoir, Deceased, vs. Plaintiff, ROPES COURSES, INC., FB ORLANDO

More information

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW DIVISION 7 FAMILY LAW Rule Effective 700. Subject Matter of the Family Law Court 07/01/2011 700.5 Attorneys and Self Represented Parties 07/01/2011 700.6 Family Law Filings 01/01/2012 701. Assignment of

More information

Case 3:14-cv-00137-AC Document 10 Filed 03/26/14 Page 1 of 14 Page ID#: 43

Case 3:14-cv-00137-AC Document 10 Filed 03/26/14 Page 1 of 14 Page ID#: 43 Case 3:14-cv-00137-AC Document 10 Filed 03/26/14 Page 1 of 14 Page ID#: 43 Calvin L. Keith, OSB No. 814368 CKeith@perkinscoie.com Sarah J. Crooks, OSB No. 971512 SCrooks@perkinscoie.com PERKINS COIE LLP

More information

INTRODUCTION TO SMALL CLAIMS COURT TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION TO SMALL CLAIMS COURT TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO SMALL CLAIMS COURT TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO SUE OR NOT TO SUE? HOW TO FILE A SMALL CLAIMS CASE WHERE TO FILE FILING FEE NOTICE TO THE DEFENDANT COUNTERCLAIMS PREPARING FOR TRIAL

More information