Date: 07-04-2013

Case Style: Miller Fischer v. Janet Smith

Case Number: CJ-2012-1460

Judge: Carlos Chappelle

Court: District Court, Tulsa county, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Steven R. Hickman

Defendant's Attorney: Melissa Minton Schmidt

Description: Miller Fischer sued Janet Smith on an auto negligence theory claiming:

1. Plaintiff, Millie Fischer, and Defendant, Janet Smith, are residents of Oklahoma.

2. On or about the 13th day of May, 2010, on U.S. Highway 75 in Glenpool, Tulsa County, Oklahoma, Defendant negligently operated her vehicle so as to collide with that in which Plaintiff was riding, causing Plaintiff serious, grievous and permanent injuries.

3. As a result, Plaintiff has incurred and will incur expenses for medical care and attention, has endured and will endure pain and suffering, and has suffered an impaired earning capacity.

4. At the time of the accident referenced, Plaintiff was a healthy, able bodied female of 56 years of age with a normal life expectancy of 27.5 years according to the United States Life Tables.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant in a sum in excess of $10,000, interest, costs, and such other and further relief to which Plaintiff is deemed entitled.

1. The Defendant generally and specifically denies each and every material allegation in Plaintiff’s Petition except those allegations specifically admitted herein.

2. The Defendant admits that jurisdiction and venue are proper in Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.

3. The Defendant admits that an automobile accident occurred between the parties on our about 05-13-10 in Tulsa, County, State of Oklahoma.

4 The Defendant denies all allegations of ne)gt’gerce and demand strict proof thereof I

5 The Defendant denies all allegations of damagi and demands strict proof thereof. The Defendant further assert that Plaintiffs’ damages are the result of conditions/causes which are-, unrelated to the subject accident.

6. The Defendant reserves the right to amend his Answer upon completion of discovery.

WHEREFORE, having fully answered, the Defendant prays that Plaintiff take nothing by way of her Petition against her and prays that judgment be entered in her favor and against the Plaintiffs and for such further and equitable relief this Court deems just and proper.

Outcome: Settled and dismissed with prejudice.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: