Date: 07-11-2014

Case Style: Sheldon D. Sparks v. Matthew Gregory Conrad

Case Number: CJ-2014-1246

Judge: Mark Barcus

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Richard Sherwin Toon

Defendant's Attorney: Maurice G. Woods, II and Christine B. McInnes

Description: Sheldon D. Sparks v. Matthew Gregory Conrad

1. Plaintiff is a resident of Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
2. Defendant is a resident of Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
3. Plaintiff and Defendant were involved in a motor vehicle collision that occurred in Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma, on or about April 3,2012.
4. Venue is proper in Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
5. This Court possesses subject matter jurisdiction over this action.
6. Pursuant to 12 OS. § 2008 (A)(2), Plaintiff states, complete diversity jurisdiction
does not exist. See, 28 U.S.C. § 1332; therefore, removal of this action to federal
court would not be proper. However, the amount in controversy is in excess of
the amount required for diversity junsdiction pursuant to 28 U S C § 1332
7. All acts and/or omissions that are the subject of this lawsuit occurred in TulsA
County, State of Oklahoma.
8. Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for negligence.
9. Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for negligence per se as a result of Defendant’s acts and/or omissions under Oklahoma’s Motor-vehicle Statutes (47 O.S. § 11-101, et seq.).
10. On or about April 3,2012, Defendant negligently operated a vehicle and collided with Plaintiff.
11. Defendant failed to exercise caution and requisite care.
12. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s negligent acts and/or omissions, Plaintiff sustained injuries and damages, including but not limited to physical pain and mental anguish, inconvenience, trauma, suffering, loss of service, medical expenses, loss of wages and other damages.
13. Plaintiff is entitled to recover compensation from Defendant for damages in an amount that exceeds the jurisdictional minimums of this Court.
14. Defendant’s actions and/or omissions caused damages to entitle Plaintiff to recover damages from the Defendant in an amount in excess of the jurisdictional minimums of this Court

Outcome: Settled and dismissed with prejudice.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: