Date: 01-26-2016

Case Style: Darla Denise Combs v. Barbara Sue Mann

Case Number: CJ-2014-3899

Judge: Dana Kuehn

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Mike Masterson and Bryan Smith for Darla Denise Combs

Billy Giffin, Jason Reynolds and Jon Williford for Derayl Harrison

Defendant's Attorney: Shanda McKenney, Bruce Powers

Description: Tulsa, OK - Darla Denise Combs sued Barbara Sue Mann claiming:


1. That at all times relevant herein, Plaintiff was a resident of Tulsa County, Oklahoma.
Defendant Barbara Sue Mann, was a resident of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. That the automobile
accident that gives rise to this litigation occurred in Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Jurisdiction and
venue are proper in the District Court in and for Tulsa County, Oklahoma.
2. On August 1, 2014, Plaintiff Darla Denise Combs was operating her Honda
East 61st Street in Tulsa, Oklahoma. She was travelling on East 61st Street toward the intersctiol!;!.
at South Peoria Avenue when a vehicle driven by Defendant Barbara Sue Mann turned left in fro,itX
of Combs' vehicle. The collision was caused solely by the negligence of Barbara Sue Mann in failing to yield to oncoming traffic.
3. As a result of the collision, Plaintiff Darla Denise Combs sustained personal injuries
that have been painful and progressive and required medical treatment. Additionally, her vehicle
was a total loss as a result of the accident. Plaintiff has sustained damages as a result of the negligence of Defendant Barbara Sue Mann.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff, Darla Denise Combs, prays for
judgment against the Defendant herein in an amount in excess of ten-thousand dollars ($10,000) together with their costs, interest, and any other such relief to which the Court deems them entitled in the premises.

Answer and Counterclaim

1. Defendant Barbara S. Mann generally and specifically denies each and every material allegation contained in the Petition filed on behalf of the Plaintiff except those which are specifically admitted hereinafter.
2. Defendant Barbara S. Mann admits the allegations in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff s
Petition, with the exception that the Defendant is without sufficient information., {o:eithtiadmit
or deny the allegations as to Plaintiff s residence and therefore denies paragrap {n reitds to
Plaintiff s residence and demands strict proof thereof.
3. Defendant Barbara S. Mann admits an accident happened at or.'itear, the te and
time described in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff s Petition, but denies the remaining allegations.
4. Defendant Barbara S. Mann is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff s Petition. Therefore, Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff s Petition is denied and Defendant Barbara S. Mann demands strict proof thereof.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

5. Defendant contends that the Plaintiff is negligent and that such negligence caused or contributed to the cause of the accident. A recovery by the Plaintiff, if any, must be reduced by her percentage of negligence.
6. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim against Defendant upon which relief can be granted.
7. Defendant reserves the right to amend this Answer in accordance with Title 12
O.S. § 2015 or, upon the completion of discovery, following proper application to the Court.
8. By way of further defense and pleading in the alternative, Plaintiff s medical treatment was unreasonable and unnecessary.

COUNTERCLAIM

COMES NOW the Defendant, Barbara S. Mann, and alleges the following for counterclaim against Plaintiff, Darla Denise Combs:

9. Plaintiff was negligent and at fault for the accident described in her Petition.
10. As a direct result of Plaintiff s negligence, Defendant incurred damages to her vehicle in the approximate amount of $5,155.78.

WHEREFORE, having fully answered, Defendant, Barbara S. Mann, prays that the Plaintiff takes nothing by reason of her Petition and that this action be dismissed for an award of costs and attorney's fees and for all other relief deemed equitable by the Court; and that judgment be rendered in favor of Defendant on her counterclaim against Plaintiff, Darla Denise Combs, for a sum of approximately Four Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($5.155.78), the costs of this action and for such other and further relief to which she may be entitled.

Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Counterclaim

1. There were no allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 8 of De.f-erit·a-·nt 's
admissions and denials that constitute a claim upon which PlaintisSrequjd to
respond. To the extent Plaintiff is required to respond to the admisand°clenials
contained in Paragraphs 1 through 8 of Defendant Mann's Answer and Courclaim the same are denied.
2. The allegations contained in Paragraphs 9 and 10 of Defendant Mann's Counterclaim are specifically denied.
3. The Wherefore paragraph of Defendant Mann's Counterclaim is specifically denied.
4. Defendant Mann's Counterclaim is for property damage, and pursuant to 12 O.S. § 940, Plaintiff Combs is entitled to her reasonable attorney fees and costs for defending Defendant Mann's Counterclaim.
5. Defendant Combs, pursuant to 12 O.S. § 940, is entitled to the property damages Plaintiff Combs sustained as a result of Defendant Mann's negligence, along with h r costs and attorney fees.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Plaintiff Combs generally and specifically denies each and every allegation of negligence as alleged by Defendant Mann in her Counterclaim and asserts that the accident and the sole cause of Defendant Mann's property damage was Defendant Mann's own negligence, for which her recovery is barred.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, having fully answered, prays that Defendant's Counterclaim be dismissed and that Plaintiff be awarded her costs as well as Plaintiff's attorney's fees and such other relief as this Court deems just and equitable.

Outcome: Dismissal with prejudice as to Darla Denis Combs

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: