Porsche Legal Document

Case 2:14-cv-03747-PSG-MRW Document 40 Filed 03/30/15 Page 1 of 9 Page ID #:430
1 STEPHEN T. WAIMEY (SBN 87262)

stephen.waimey@lhlaw.com
2 YVONNE DALTON (SBN 216515)
yvonne.dalton@lhlaw.com
3 ANIKA S. PADHIAR (SBN 272632)
anika.padhiar@lhaw.com
4 LEE, HONG, DEGERMAN, KANG &
WAIMEY
5 3501 Jamboree Road, Suite 6000
Newport Beach, CA 92660
6 Telephone: 949.250.9954
Facsimile: 949.250.9957
7
CHRISTOPHER C. SPENCER (VSB No. 21878)
8 cspencer@spencershuford.com
MARK C. SHUFORD (VSB No. 31075)
9 mshuford@spencershuford.com
JEFFERY H. NEWHOUSE (NYSB No. 4633210)
jnewhouse@spencershuford.com
LEE, HONG, DEGERMAN, KANG & WAIMEY
10
SPENCER SHUFORD LLP
11 6806 Paragon Place, Suite 200
Newport Beach, California 92660
3501 Jamboree Road, Suite 6000
Richmond, VA 23230
12 Telephone: 804.285.5200
Facsimile: 804.285.5210
13
14 Attorneys for Defendant
PORSCHE CARS NORTH AMERICA, INC.
15
16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
17 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
18 KRISTINE M. RODAS, individually, CASE NO. 2:14-cv-03747-PSG-MRW

19 and as successor-in-interest, and on
behalf of the Estate of Roger W. Rodas, Hon. Philip S. Guitierrez
20
Plaintiff, PORSCHE CARS NORTH
21 AMERICA, INC’S ANSWER TO
22 v. THE FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT
23 PORSCHE CARS NORTH
24 AMERICA, INC., a Delaware
corporation; and DOES 1-20, inclusive,
25
26 Defendants.
27
28
PORSCHE CARS NOTH AMERICA, INC.’S ANSWER TO THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050
1 PORSCHE CARS NORTH AMERICA, INC. (“PCNA”), pursuant to Rules

2 8 and 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, states as follows for its Answer
3 and Affirmative Defenses to the plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint:
4 THE PARTIES
5 1. PCNA does not have knowledge or information sufficient to form a
6 belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 1 and, therefore, denies them.
7 2. PCNA admits the allegations in Paragraph 2.
8 3. No response is required to Paragraph 3.
9 4. No response is required to Paragraph 4.
10 VENUE AND JURISDICTION

11 5. PCNA admits that the crash at issue took place is the County of Los
12 Angeles. To the extent that this paragraph alleges that PCNA took any actions
13 related to the allegations in this lawsuit in the County of Los Angeles, PCNA
14 denies the allegations.
15 6. PCNA admits that this Court has jurisdiction over this action. PCNA
16 denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 6.
17 7. PCNA admits the allegations in Paragraph 7.
18 STATEMENT OF FACTS
19 8. PCNA does not have knowledge or information sufficient to form a
20 belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraphs 8-10 and, therefore, denies
21 them.
22 9. PCNA admits that on November 30, 2013, Roger Rodas drove the
23 2005 Porsche Carrera GT and that Paul Walker was a passenger in it as of the time
24 of the crash. PCNA denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 11.
25 10. As to the allegations in Paragraph 12, PCNA admits that Mr. Rodas
26 was driving the vehicle on Kelly Johnson Parkway in Santa Clarita, and that Kelly
27 Johnson Parkway curves right in the eastbound direction to become Hercules
28 Street. PCNA denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 12.
1
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050
1 11. As to the allegations in Paragraph 13, PCNA admits that Mr. Rodas
2 hit a light pole and trees, and that there was a fire. PCNA denies the remaining
3 allegations in Paragraph 13.
4 12. As to the allegations in Paragraph 14, PCNA admits that the 2005
5 Carrera GT was a new design for Porsche and that competitor vehicles included the
6 Ferrari Enzo, Lamborghini Murciélago and Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren. PCNA
8 13. PCNA denies the allegations in Paragraph 15.
9 14. As to the allegations in Paragraph 16, the specifications of the as-
10 designed vehicle speak for themselves and PCNA denies all allegations
11 inconsistent with those.
12 15. As to the allegations in Paragraph 17, PCNA admits that the Carrera
13 GT is constructed, in part, out of carbon fiber, aluminum, and titanium. PCNA
15 16. As to the allegations in Paragraph 18, PCNA admits that the subject
16 vehicle is safe by design, and that certain individual Porsche entities distributed
17 press release materials and promotional videos. PCNA denies the remaining
18 allegations in the first sentence of Paragraph 18. The remaining allegations made
19 in Paragraph 18 are vague and overly broad. PCNA does not know which
20 promotion video or materials are the subject of these allegations. Therefore, it
21 does not have knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
22 of the allegations and denies them.
23 17. PCNA denies the allegations in Paragraphs 19.
24 18. As to the allegations of Paragraph 20, PCNA does not know what the
25 plaintiff’s experts have said to her, and therefore denies these allegations.
26 19. -26.
27
28
2
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050
1 20. PCNA denies the allegations in the first sentence of Paragraph 27.
2 PCNA does not have knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
3 truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 27 and, therefore, denies them.
4 21. As to the allegations in Paragraph 28, PCNA admits that in 2005
5 certain Porsche entities were involved in a lawsuit where an individual crashed a
6 2005 Carrera GT while driving in a track day event on a racetrack. He and his
7 passenger died. PCNA denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 28.
8 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
9 Negligence – Products Liability
10 22. As to the allegations incorporated in Paragraph 29, PCNA

11 incorporates its prior responses.
12 23. As to the allegations in Paragraphs 30, PCNA admits that it

13 distributed and sold to distributors and retailers for sale the 2005 Porsche Carrera
14 GT vehicle and it component parts in the United States. The remaining allegations
15 are either too vague to give PCNA knowledge or information sufficient to form a
16 belief as to their truth or are false. Therefore, PCNA denies them.
17 24. PCNA denies the allegations in Paragraph 31.
18 25. Paragraph 32 is a legal conclusion to which no response is required.
19 26. PCNA denies the allegations in Paragraph 33-37.
20 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
21 Strict Products Liability
24 28. As to the allegations in Paragraphs 39-45, PCNA admits that it
25 distributed the model year 2005 Porsche Carrera GT vehicles in the United States.
26 PCNA denies that there were defects in the subject vehicle as designed and
27 manufactured, and denies that anything about the original design or manufacture of
28
3
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050
1 the vehicle caused the crash or Mr. Rodas’s death. Accordingly, PCNA denies the
2 remaining allegations in Paragraphs 39-45.
3 29. PCNA denies the allegations in Paragraphs 46-50.
4 30. As to the allegations in Paragraph 51, PCNA admits that in 2005
5 certain Porsche entities were involved in a lawsuit where an individual crashed a
6 2005 Carrera GT while driving on a racetrack. PCNA denies the remaining
7 allegations in Paragraph 51 as phrased.
8 31. PCNA denies the allegations in Paragraphs 52 – 53.
9 32. PCNA denies that there are any defects with the Carrera GT, and
10 therefore denies the allegations in Paragraph 54.

11 33. PCNA denies that there were any defects or unreasonable dangers
12 associated with the Carrera GT and, therefore, denies the allegations in Paragraphs
13 55-57.
14 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
15 Violation of California’s Unfair Competition Laws
16 (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq.)
17 34. The allegations in Paragraph 58-67 relate to a claim that the Court
18 dismissed in its February 13, 2015 Order and no response is required by PCNA.
19 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
20 Violation of California’s False Advertising Laws
24 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
25 Violation of California’s False Advertising Laws
4
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050
1 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

2 Survival Claim
5 38. While PCNA admits that Mr. Rodas died, it does not have knowledge
6 and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining
7 allegations in Paragraph 89, and therefore denies them.
8 39. Paragraph 90 contains legal conclusions and no response is required.
9 To the extent a response is required, PCNA denies the allegations.
10 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

11 Wrongful Death

14 41. While PCNA admits that Mr. Rodas died, it does not have knowledge
15 and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining
16 allegations in Paragraph 92, and therefore denies them.
17 42. Paragraph 93 contains legal conclusions and no response is required.
18 To the extent a response is required, PCNA denies the allegations.
19 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
20 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
21 (Failure to State Cause of Action)
22 43. Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
23 granted under Rule 12.
24 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
25 (Comparative Fault)
26 44. Roger Rodas’s death, and all other injuries or damages claimed, were
27 the result of Roger Rodas’s own comparative fault.
28 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
5
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050
1 (Assumption of Risk)
2 45. PCNA alleges that Roger Rodas knowingly and voluntarily assumed
3 all risk, perils and danger in respect to the operation or use of the subject 2005
4 Carrera GT, that the perils, risk and dangers were open and obvious and known to
5 him, and that he chose to conduct himself in a manner so as to expose himself and
6 others to such perils, dangers and risks, thus assuming all the risks involved in
7 using and operating the vehicle. Roger Rodas’s voluntary assumption of the risk
8 should bar the plaintiff’s recovery or, in the alternative, should reduce plaintiff’s
9 right to recovery from PCNA in an amount equivalent to Roger Rodas’s fault.
10 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

11 (Third Party Liability)
12 46. PCNA is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that the
13 damages plaintiff alleges were either wholly or partially caused or contributed to
14 by persons or entities other than PCNA, either named or unnamed, and PCNA is
15 entitled to an apportionment among all such parties according to their
16 responsibilities for such injuries and damages, if any, sustained by plaintiffs.
17 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
18 (Fair Responsibility Act)
19 47. PCNA is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that
20 PCNA’s liability, if any, is limited pursuant to Civil Code, Section 1431, et seq.,
21 and any damages awarded to plaintiffs against PCNA should be accordingly
22 reduced.
23 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
24 (Intervening/Superseding Actions)
26 injuries and damages allegedly sustained by plaintiffs were the direct and
27 proximate result of the intervening and superseding actions of third parties,
28 whether named or unnamed, and not PCNA.
6
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050
1 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2 (State-of-the-Art)
3 49. PCNA is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that at the
4 time the subject 2005 Carrera GT was originally sold and delivered, it comported
5 with the state of the art at the time of manufacture.
6 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
7 (Abuse/Alteration)
9 subject 2005 Carrera GT was abused and altered after being placed into the stream
10 of commerce in a manner that was not reasonably foreseeable to PCNA. That

11 abuse and alteration reasonably caused or contributed to the alleged incident and to
12 the injuries, loss, and damage, if any.

13 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
14 (Misuse of Product/Improper Maintenance)
16 subject 2005 Carrera GT was misused or improperly maintained. That misuse or
17 improper maintenance reasonably caused or contributed to the alleged incident and
18 to the injuries, loss, and damages, if any.
19 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
20 (Additional Warnings)
21 52. PCNA is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges that no
22 additional warnings would have, or could have prevented the alleged incident, the
23 injuries, loss and damages alleged by plaintiffs.
24 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
25 (Sophisticated User)
26 53. PCNA is informed, believes, and alleges that Plaintiff is barred from
27 recovery because Roger Rodas was a knowledgeable and sophisticated user of the
28 2005 Carrera GT.
7
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050
1 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2 (Reservation of Rights)
3 54. PCNA reserves the right to file additional affirmative defenses as may
4 be appropriate upon completion of its investigation and discovery. Further, any
5 allegations contained in the Complaint which have not yet been admitted, denied or
6 otherwise explained are now specifically denied.
7 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
8 For the foregoing reasons, PCNA respectfully requests that this action be
9 dismissed and that it be awarded its costs, attorney’s fees and all other relief that is
10 appropriate.
11 PCNA DEMANDS TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL APPROPRIATE CLAIMS
12 AND DEFENSES.
13
14 Dated: March 30, 2015 SPENCER SHUFORD LLP
15 By: /s/ Christopher C. Spencer_______
16 Christopher C. Spencer
17 Mark C. Shuford
Jeffrey H. Newhouse
18
19 and
20 LEE, HONG, DEGERMAN, KANG &

21 WAIMEY
22 Stephen T. Waimey
23 Yvonne Dalton
Anika S. Padhiar
24
25 Attorneys for Defendant
PORSCHE CARS NORTH AMERICA,
26
INC.
27
28
8
EAST\67129387.1
017954-000050

Porsche Legal Document

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Porsche Legal Document

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Case 2:14-cv-03747-PSG-MRW Document 40 Filed 03/30/15 Page 1 of 9 Page ID #:430

1 STEPHEN T. WAIMEY (SBN 87262)

17 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18 KRISTINE M. RODAS, individually, CASE NO. 2:14-cv-03747-PSG-MRW

1 PORSCHE CARS NORTH AMERICA, INC. (“PCNA”), pursuant to Rules

10 VENUE AND JURISDICTION

10 22. As to the allegations incorporated in Paragraph 29, PCNA

12 23. As to the allegations in Paragraphs 30, PCNA admits that it

10 therefore denies the allegations in Paragraph 54.

1 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

10 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

12 40. As to the allegations incorporated in Paragraph 91, PCNA

10 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

1 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

10 of commerce in a manner that was not reasonably foreseeable to PCNA. That

12 the injuries, loss, and damage, if any.

1 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

20 LEE, HONG, DEGERMAN, KANG &

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen