Date: 02-10-2014

Case Style: Janay Perry v. Zoe Hocker

Case Number: CJ-2011-4174

Judge: Thomas E. Prince

Court: District Court, Oklahoma County, Okalahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Mark L. Miller

Defendant's Attorney: Alisa Shaddix White

Description: COMES NOW the Plaintiffs, Janay Perry, an individual and Trey Smith, an individual, by and through their attorneys of record, Garrett Law Office, P.C., aiid for this cause of action against the Defendant, Zoe 1-locker, alleges and states as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

I. That the Plaintiff, Janay Perry, is a resident ofMidwest City, Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma. The Plaintiff, Trey Smith, is a resident of Midwest City, Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma That Defendant is a resident of Edna, Labette County, State of Kansas That the automobile accident giving rise to this action occurred in Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, thus making jurisdiction of this Court just and proper.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

2. That on December 10,2010, the Plaintiff, Janay Perry was operating a motor vehicle that was heading East on j 0ih street, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. That Plaintiff, Trey Smith, was a passenger in the vehicle with Janay Perry. The Defendant did fail to yield and did carelessly, recklessly and negligently collide with the with Plaintiff’s vehicle.

3. That by failing to yield Defendant did commit negligence per se.

4. That as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s negligence and negligence per se, the Plaintifft suffered serious bodily injuries, have endured and continues to endure both physical and mental pain and suffering, have incurred lost wages in the past and will incur loss of earning capacity in the future, have incurred and continues to incur medical expenses, have lost the enjoyment of life, and have suffered further damages all of which will be more particularly proven at trial and which entitle the Plaintiffs to collect a sum in excess of $75,000.00 from the Defendant.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Plaintiffs pray that this Court award them damages in excess of $75,000.00 from the Defendant, including attomey’s fees, costs, interest, and any such further relief that this Court deems just and proper.

ANSWER

COMES NOW the Defendant, ZOE HOCKER, and for answer to P1 ntiffs’ Petition, states:

1.

The Defendant is without sufficient information and/or knowledge to admit or deny the residency of Plaintiffs as alleged in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs’ Petition and demands strict proof thereof. Defendant admits that she is a resident of Edna, Labette County, Kansas and that jurisdiction in Oklahoma County is proper.

2.

The Defendant specifically denies those allegations and claims contained in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs’ Petition and demands strict proof thereof.

3.

The Defendant specifically denies those allegations and claims contained in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs’ Petition and demands strict proof thereof.

4.

The Defendant specifically denies those allegations and claims contained in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiffs’ Petition and demands strict proof thereof.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

COMES NOW Defendant, ZOE HOCKER, and states the following affirmative defenses to the Petition filed by Plaintiffs herein:

5.

The Petition fails to state a claim against Defendant upon which relief can be granted.

6.

Plaintiffs’ driver, Janay Perry, was negligent. Such negligence on the part of Plaintiffs’ driver proximately caused or contributed to the accident and Plaintiffs’ damage, if any, and such negligence on the part of the Plaintiffs’ driver together with the negligence of the Plaintiffs were greater than the negligence of the Defendant, and Plaintiffs are therefore not entitled to recover.

7.

Whether the Plaintiffs suffer from any pre-existing or post-arising medical condition will be developed during discovery and Defendant herein reserves all defenses in that regard.

8.

Whether the Plaintiffs have acted to mitigate their damages will be developed during discovery and Defendant herein reserves all defenses in that regard.

9.

The Plaintiffs assumed the risk of injury resulting from the negligence of the Defendant, if any, by voluntarily and unreasonably exposing themselves to injury with the knowledge and appreciation of the danger and risk involved.

10.

Defendant reserves the right to plead additional affirmative defenses as discovery progresses.

WHEREFORE, having hilly answered, Defendant prays that Plaintiffs take nothing by way of their Petition herein and that Defendant be dismissed with costs and attorney fees and any other relief this Court may deem equitable and just.

Outcome: 02-10-2014 CTFREE - 77380125 Feb 11 2014 8:27:33:363AM - $ 0.00

PRINCE: JURY TRIAL DAY 1-ENT: CASE COMES ON FOR JURY TRIAL.PLAINTIFF APPEARS WITH COUNSEL MARK MILLER. ALLISA WHITE APPEARS WITH DEFENDANT. BOTH PARTIES ANNOUNCE READY. 25 JURORS SWORN TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. 18 CALLED TO THE BOX. COURT CALLED TO THE BOX. PROSPECTIVE JURORS EXCUSED FOR CAUSE. JURY EXAMINATION BY PLAINTIFF AND PASSED FOR CAUSE. JURY EXAMINATION BY DEFENDANT AND PASSED FOR CAUSE. PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES, ALL CHALLENGES CALLED. 12 JURORS SWORN TO TRY CASE. COURT'S INSTRUCTION #1 OPENING STATEMENTS BY PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT. WITNESSES SWORN, TESTIMONY HEARD, EXHIBITS OFFERED. CROSS EXAMINATION. PARTIES REST. COURT'S INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY.CLOSING ARGUMENTS. JURY RETIRES TO DELIBERATE AND RETURNS WITH VERDICT AND FIND (1) IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENDANT ZOE HOCKER, WITH RESPECT TO THE CLAIMS OF PLAINTIFF JANAY PERRY, SIGNED BY JURY FOREPERSON. (2) IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF ZOE HOCKER WITH RESPECT TO THE CLAIMS OF PLAINTIFF TREY SMITH. SIGNED BY JURY FOREPERSON. JURY DISCHARGED. CLERK DIRECTED TO FILE AND RECORD VERDICT ACCORDINGLY. MARLENA BROWN HOLCOMB, COURT REPORTER.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: