M ORE L AW
LEXAPEDIA
Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto

Information
About MoreLaw
Contact MoreLaw

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

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 02-04-2013

Case Style: Jeff Gigstad v. Michael Robert Hernandez

Case Number: CJ-2012-3816

Judge: Bill Graves

Court: District Court, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Eric A. Urbach

Defendant's Attorney: Brandon P. Wilson and Michael Woodson

Description: Jeff Gigstad and Sarah Gigstad, as individualls and as parents of Caden Gigstad, a minor, sued Michael Robert Hernandez on an auto negligence theory claiming:

1. On August 14, 2011 in Edmond, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, Defendant
negligently struck Plaintiffs’ vehicle.

2. Plaintiffs were injured in the collision. Plaintiffs have incurred and will incur
medical bills, suffered and will suffer pain, have and will lose income, and has sustained
property damage.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray judgment against Defendant, in excess of the
amount required for diversity jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1332 of Title 28 of the United States Code, costs, fees, interest and all other appropriate relief.

Defendant appeared and answered as follows:

1. With respect to paragraph I of Plaintiffs’ Petition, Defendant admits that a motor vehicle accident occurred on or about August 14, 2011 in or near Edmond, Oklahoma involving a vehicle operated by Defendant and Plaintiffs’ vehicle. Defendant denies the balance of paragraph I and specifically denies any allegations of tortious conduct and demands strict proof thereof.

2. With respect to paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs’ Petition, Defendant is without sufficient information to admit or deny said paragraph, and, therefore, Defendant denies the same and demands strict proof thereof
Affirmative Defenses
Defendant reserves the right to raise the following affirmative defenses:

1. Comparative/Contributory Negligence.

2. The Defendant was confronted with a sudden emergency and acted as a reasonably
prudent person would act under the same or similar circumstances.

3. The accident was an unavoidable casualty and misfortune which occurred without the negligence of the Defendant.

4. The accident was caused by a third-party over whom this Defendant exercised no
control.

5. The Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate damages.

6. The Defendant reserves the right to raise additional affirmative defenses as discovery
continues.

WHEREFORE, having answered, Defendant prays that Plaintiffs take nothing herein. Defendant also prays for any and all other relief deemed just and equitable, including an award of attorney’s fees and costs.

Outcome: 1. This case arises out of an automobile accident that occurred on August 14, 2011 in Oklahoma County, state of Oklahoma. All three Plaintiffs (Jeff, Sarah, and Caden) were in a vehicle that was in the accident. Defendant operated the other vehicle.

2. Plaintiffs alleged in this instant suit that Defendant was negligent in the operation of a motor vehicle and that, as a result of his negligence, Plaintiffs Jeff and Sarah Gigstad, along with their minor son, were injured.

3. Plaintiffs Jeff and Sarah Gigstad are the biological parents of minor Caden Gigstad. Said minor resides with Jeff and Sarah Gigstad, and Jeff and Sarah Gigstad are responsible, generally, for the health and welfare of said minor.

4. Plaintiffs and Defendant negotiated and, after negotiation, agreed to settle the claims involved in this lawsuit. The claims and contentions of Plaintiff Jeff Gigstad and Plaintiff Sarah Gigstad have been compromised, and are not a subject of this Joint Motion. The claims of these adult-claimants will be the subject of a dismissal with prejudice to be filed. Plaintiffs Jeff and Sarah Gigstad, as parents and next friends of Caden Gigstad, have also reached a settlement agreement with Defendant with regard to Caden’s claims.

5. Plaintiffs Jeff and Sarah Gigstad, as parents and next friends of Caden Gigstad, believe the settlement that was reached to be in the best interests of the minor under the circumstances.

6. Plaintiffs and Defendants pray that the Court will try this case by agreement, and, following said hearing, find that the settlement is reasonable under the circumstances, approve the minor’s settlement, and enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiffs Jeff and Sarah Gigstad specifically for the benefit of the minor Caden Gigstad. The parties also jointly pray that, in addition to entering judgment, the Court would enter an Order supplementing the Journal Entry in which the funds are distributed.

7. A proposed Journal Entry of Judgment is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

8. A proposed distribution order will be presented to the Court at the time of hearing.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the parties jointly pray that the Court approve the settlement, enterjudgment consistently therewith, and make and order distributing the funds pursuant to Oklahoma law.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



 
 
Home | Add Attorney | Add Expert | Add Court Reporter | Sign In
Find-A-Lawyer By City | Find-A-Lawyer By State and City | Articles | Recent Lawyer Listings
Verdict Corrections | Link Errors | Advertising | Editor | Privacy Statement
© 1996-2019 MoreLaw, Inc. - All rights reserved.