Case Style: David Wayne Jones v. Fred T. Ray
Case Number: CJ-2012-2474
Judge: Barbara G. Swinton
Court: District Court, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma
Plaintiff's Attorney: Chad W. Kelliher and Thomas K. Ventura
Defendant's Attorney: William D. Pettigrew
Description: 1. That Plaintiffs David Wayne Jones and Tina Ray Jones and their minor child, Anna Marie Jones, are residents of Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma.
2. That Defendant Fred T. Jones is a resident of Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma.
3. That on or about February 17, 2012, in the City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, at or near the intersection of North E. K. Gaylord Blvd. and West Sheridan Aye, Defendant Fred I. Ray did negligently cause a motor vehicle to strike the body of Anna Marie Jones, a minor, as she was crossing North B. K. Gaylord Blvd. in a pedestrian crosswalk. Anna Marie Jones sustained personal injuries as a result of said incident.
4. That the Defendant was negligent in the operation of his motor vehicle which caused the collision complained of herein. The Defendant failed to devote fUll time and attention to his driving and/or failed to yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian in a crosswalk.
5. That the Defendant’s conduct was in violation of 47 O.S. §11-504 and as such constitutes negligence per Se.
6. Prior to the collision complained of herein, Anna Marie Jones, a minor, was in good health with a normal life expectancy, but as a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendant she and her parents, Plaintiff’s David Wayne Jones and Tina Ray Jones, have sustained damages for which they are entitled to recover.
7. Pursuant to the provisions of 12 O.S. §3226, Plaintiffs submit this preliminary computation of damages sought in this lawsuit. As this is an action for injuries suffered by a minor child, Plaintiffs advise that all damages recoverable by law are sought, including those listed in O.U.JJ 4.2 and O,U.JJ. 4.3. Under item (H), the exact amount of the medical expenses Plaintiffs David Wayne Jones and Tina Ray Jones have incurred on behalf of their minor child Anna Marie Jones is presently unknown. Presently, Anna Marie Jones continues to receive medical treatment for her injuries and her parents David Wayne Jones and Tina Ray Jones anticipate they will incur medical and other related expenses on her behalf for the foreseeable future. Other the amount of past and future medical and other related expenses which are presently unknown, Plaintiffs are unable to guess or speculate as to the amount of damages a jury might award. The elements for the jury to consider in the fixing the amount of damages to award including the following:
A. Anna Marie Jones’s physical pain and suffering, past and future;
B. Anna Marie Jones’s mental pain and suffering, past and future;
C. Anna Marie Jones’s age;
D. Anna Marie Jones’s physical condition immediately before and after the accident;
E. The nature and extent of Anna Marie Jones’s injuries;
F. Whether the injuries are permanent;
U. The physical impairment; and
H. The reasonable expenses of the necessary medical care, treatment and services David Wayne Jones and Tina Ray Jones have incurred on behalf of Anna Marie Jones or will incur in the friture from now until Anna Marie Jones reaches the age of eighteen.
WHEREFORE Plaintiffs pray from judgment against the Defendant in an amount in excess of the amount required for diversity jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1332 of Title 28 of the United States Code, together with interest, costs and any and all further relief to which they may be entitled to in law or in equity.
Defendant Fred Ray appeared and answered as follows:
1. The Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny those claims and allegations contained in paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs Petition and therefore demands strict proof thereof
2. The Defendant admits those claims and allegations contained in paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs Petition.
3. The Defendant admits that an accident took place on the date and near the location listed in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff’s Petition. The Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny those remaining claims and allegations contained in paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs Petition and therefore demands strict proof thereof.
4. The Defendant denies those claims and allegations contained in paragraph 4 of Plaintiffs Petition and therefore demands strict proof thereof
5. The Defendant denies those claims and allegations contained in paragraph 5 of Plaintiffs Petition and therefore demands strict proof thereof
6. The Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or infonnation to admit or deny those claims and allegations contained in paragraph 6 of Plaintiffs Petition and therefore demands strict proof thereof.
7. The Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny those claims and allegations contained in paragraph 7 of Plaintiffs Petition and therefore demands strict proof thereof.
For ffirther answer and defense the Defendant states as follows:
First Affirmative Defense
The negligence if any of the parties and any relevant non-parties will be developed during discovery and the Defendant specifically reserves the right to plead defenses as to contributory and comparative negligence at the time of pretrial.
Second Affirmative Defense
Whether the Plaintiff suffers from any preexisting or post-arising medical condition will be developed during discovery and the Defendants specifically reserve the right to plead those defenses at the time of pretrial.
Third Affirmative Defense
Whether Plaintiff has acted to mitigate her damage claims will be developed during discovery and the Defendant specifically reserves the right to plead that defense at the time of pretrial.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED Defendant prays that the action against him be dismissed and he be awarded costs such as the court may determine is just.
Outcome: NOW, ON THIS 22nd day of May, 2013, this matter comes on for consideration of the parties’ Joint Application for Court Approval of Settlement, and Order for Deposit. The Plaintiffs appear in person and with counsel and the Defendants appears through counsel of record, William D. Pettigrew. The Court, having reviewed the stipulations and considering the evidence presented on the record, finds as follows:
1. On or about February 17, 2012 near Shields (E.K. Gaylord) and Sheridan Avenue, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, the minor child was injured in an automobile accident.
2. That DAVID WAYNE JONES and TINA RAY JONES are the biological Parents and Next Friend of the minor child.
3. As a result of the accident, the minor Plaintiff required medical attention, and the minor Plaintiffs parents and next friend incurred certain expenses for the care of the minor Plaintiff.
4. Non-Party Garrison Property and Casualty Insurance Company, issued a policy of insurance covering, this loss.
5. The parties have reached a compromise settlement whereby the Plaintiffs agree to release and discharge Defendant FRED T. RAY and Garrison Property and Casualty Insurance Company, from any and all claims arising from the accident, in exchange for the total payment to the Plaintiffs in the amount of Twenty Two Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($22,100.00).
6. The settlement proceeds shall be distributed as follows:
Gross Settlement Amount $22,100.00
Attorney’s fees $5,525.00_________
Attorney’s Costs $1,529.80_________
Oklahoma Health Care Authority $3,243.72________
7. $1 l80l.48 shall be placed in a trust account at Bank of Oklahoma_ pursuant to 12 O.S. 1991, § 83 for the use and benefit of the minor child.
8. Plaintiffs shall pay all medical bills and liens not otherwise listed above and shall be charged with discharging all rights of subrogation or indemnification asserted by any third party. The parties agree that the payment made in accordance with this compromise settlement shall not be constrped as an admission of liability on the part of the Defendant, but rather is paid in compromise of a disputed claim in order to avoid further litigation.
9. The parties enter into this agreement of their own free will and they believe the agreement to be just and fair.
10. The Parents and Next Friends of the a minor, are aware that by asking the Court to approve this settlement that he\she\they waive(s) the minor’s right to trial by jury. He\She\They is\are aware that the minor, has until one year beyond their eighteenth birthday to bring suit against Defendant as to the claims against him\her\it. He\She\They freely, knowingly, and voluntarily asks the Court to approve their waiver of these rights on behalf of the minor child.
11. The Court finds that this settlement is in the best interest of the minor child and the Parent and Next Friend agrees with the Court’s ruling in this regard.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AJ’41Z) DECREED by the Court that the Order Approving Settlement and Order for Deposit filed by the parties to this action should be and the same is hereby canted, and this Court approves the terms of the settlement agreement as set out herein.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Court that the finds on deposit with the above identified Bank in this case shall be held for the minor child and that no withdrawal shall be made or allowed without further order of the Court or until the minor presents 2 forms of ID indicating that he/she/they have reached their 1 8th birthday. This Order binds all providers, Parent(s), Guardian(s), the Bank, it’s employees, officers, assigns and successors.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Court that the claims of Plaintiffs are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Court that the Probate Division of this Court retain jurisdiction over the settlement fluids pursuant to 12 O,S. § 83, until the minor reaches their 18th birthday.