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

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 11-05-2013

Case Style: Raymond Ontiveros v. Jena Merrill fka Jena Straham and T.J. Merrill

Case Number: CJ-2012-6175

Judge: Jefferson D. Sellers

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: John A.L. Campbell

Defendant's Attorney: Melissa S. Minton Schmidt for for Jena Merrill and T.J. Merrill

Description: Raymond Ontiveros sued Jena Merrill fka Jena Straham and T.J. Merrill on an auto negligence theory claiming:

1. On or about June 18, 2011, Plaintiff was driving in his ear when the Defendant drove her car into the Plaintiff’s car.

2. The accident occurred at or near the intersection of 3Vt Street and Harvard in South Tulsa, Oklahoma.

3. The accident was caused by the Defendant’s negligence.

4. As a result of the Defendant’s negligence, Plaintiff suffered damages including personal in] ury, pain and suffering, temporary and permanent disability, medical bills, and lost
wages.

5. Plaintiffs damages exceed $10,000.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff respectftully requests this honorable Court enter a] udgment against the Defendant and in favor of the Plaintiff for all of his damages and for other relief equitable in the premises.

Defendants appeared and answered as follows:

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

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

3. The Defendant admits that an automobile accident occurred between the parties on our about 06-18-11 in Tulsa, County, State of Oklahoma.

4. The Defendant denies all allegations of negligence and demand strict proof thereof. The Defendant further asserts that the Plaintiff’s own negligence was the sole cause of the accident or in the alternative, that the Plaintiff’s own negligence combined with the negligence of the Defendant to cause the subject accidpntN.

S. The Defendant denies all allegations of damages; and) demands strict proof thereof. The Defendant further asserts that
Plaintiff’s 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 his Petition against him and prays that judgment be entered in his favor and against the Plaintiff and for such further and equitable relief this Court deems just and proper.

Defendant T.J. Merrill offered to confess judgment in favor of Plaintiff pursuant to 12 O.S. 1101 in the amount of $1,500.00.

Outcome: Settled and dismissed with prejudice as to T.J. Merrill.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: