Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 09-10-2013

Case Style: Daniel Lee Stine v. Stephen O'Neill Fitch

Case Number: CJ-2011-4177

Judge: Mary Fitzgerald

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Tracy W. Robinett

Defendant's Attorney: Mark W. Maguire, Eric S. Houghton, Meredith D. Lindaman

Description: Daniel Lee Stine sued Stephen O'Neill Fitch and Jeneva Kay Mohammad on auto negligence theories claiming to have been injured and/or damaged in a car wreck that occurred in Tulsa County, Oklahoma caused by the defendants.

According to Defendants, the following facts were not contested:

Plaintiff filed this action as a result of an automobile accident which occurred on July 27, 2009, in which Plaintiff Stine was rear-ended by a vehicle owned by Defendant Mohammed and driven by Defendant Fitch. In his Petition, filed July 27, 2011, Plaintiff named Stephen Fitch as the alleged tortfeasor. The plaintiff also claimed Jeneva Mohammed negligently entrusted Stephen Fitch to operate the vehicle owned by Jeneva Mohammed that was involved in the subject accident. The plaintiff has also claimed punitive damages against Defendants Fitch and Mohammed.


Plaintiff Stine has failed to show Stephen Fitch acted with reckless disregard of the rights of others, or acted intentionally and with malice towards others. Plaintiff has also failed to present any evidence that Jeneva Mohammed knew or reasonably should have known that Stephen Fitch was careless, reckless, or incompetent to drive, in allowing Stephen Fitch to drive the vehicle owned by Jeneva Mohammed.

STATEMENT OF UNCONTROVERTED FACTS

1. Plaintiff Daniel Stine testified in his February 1, 2012, deposition that he heard screeching tires for five (5) seconds before the impact. (See, 02/01/12 Deposition of Daniel Stine, 27:25 — 28:04, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”).

2. Plaintiff Stine testified that he estimated Defendant Fitch’s vehicle was going about 20 or 30 miles per hour at the moment of impact. (See, 02/01/12 Deposition of Daniel Stine, 28:15 — 28:21, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”).

3. Plaintiff Stine testified that the damage to his vehicle was to the back bumper on the driver’s side, the exhaust pipe, the trunk, and the driver’s side rear taillight. Plaintiff Stine described the damage as a “standard impact.” (See, 02/01/12 Deposition of Daniel Stine, 37:25 — 38:18, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”).

4. Plaintiff Stine testified that his vehicle was driveable after the accident, and he drove it from the accident scene. (See, 02/01/12 Deposition of Daniel Stine, 37:13 — 37:19, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”).

5. Plaintiff Stine testified that he spoke with Defendant Fitch after the accident, that Fitch was being polite and cordial, and Fitch did not appear intoxicated to Plaintiff Stine. (See, 02/01/12 Deposition of Daniel Stine, 47:02 — 47:07, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”).

6. Plaintiff Stine testified that he does not recall seeing in his rear view mirror before the accident Defendant Fitch looking away or on a cell phone. (See, 02/01/12 Deposition of Daniel Stine, 48:13 — 48:16, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”).
7. Plaintiff Stine testified that he does not have any information that would lead him to believe that Defendant Fitch should not have been driving at the time of the accident (See, 02/01/12 Deposition of Daniel Stine, 102:10 — 102:14, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”).

Defendants offered to confess judgment in favor of Plaintiff pursuant to 12 O.S. 1101 in the amount of $1,000.

See Court Docket for more information at: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/GetCaseInformation.asp?number=CJ-2011-4177&db=Tulsa&submitted=true

Outcome: COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Daniel Lee Stine, by and through his attorney of record, Tracy Robinett, and dismisses with prejudice to the re-filing of the same, all claims filed against the Defendants, Stephen O’Neill Fitch and Jeneva Kay Moharumad, to the right of bringing any other future action.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: