Thursday, August 9, 2012

Your SD FL Affirmative Defense Class is Back in Session!

 
Continuing our series of instructive orders from SD FL judges on affirmative defenses, here is one by Judge Marra granting partial summary judgment on a few truly lame-o ones.

Yes, kids, you can move for summary judgment on affirmative defenses:
Defendant’s First Affirmative Defense states: “Defendant would show unto the Court that at the approximate times and places alleged, the Plaintiff was guilty of negligence materially and proximately contributing to the accidents and/or the injuries complained of and any recovery by the Plaintiff is diminished or extinguished thereby.” In support of her motion for summary judgment relative to this defense, Plaintiff has provided evidence that she was stopped when she was rear-ended [DE 53-1, p. 33]. Plaintiff also noted that the Defendant did not address this affirmative defense in its answers to interrogatories [DE 53-2, No. 6]. At the deposition of the Defendant, the corporate designee refused to answer questions relative to this affirmative defense [DE 39, pp. 67-68]. Plaintiff thus discharged her burden to demonstrate to this Court that there is an absence of evidence to support the Defendant’s First Affirmative Defense. See Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at 325.

The burden of presenting evidence in support of its First Affirmative Defense thus shifted to the Defendant. Defendant concedes in its Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment that “at this time there is no evidence to suggest that RIOS was negligent in causing the accident” [DE 54, pg. 2], and withdraws that portion of its affirmative defense. Defendant continues to state:
However, STATE FARM maintains, as is part of its First Affirmative Defense that RIOS’ actions did contribute to her injuries complained of and therefore any recovery by RIOS is diminished or extinguished thereby. STATE FARM continues to contest that accident on July 13, 2008 was the cause of RIOS’ alleged injuries. Further, as made evident in STATE FARM’S Motion for Final Summary Judgment, RIOS’ actions prejudiced STATE FARM’S ability to fully evaluate her claims. . . [T]he only issue left relating to RIOS’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment would be whether or not SANDRA RIOS was a proximate cause to the injuries complained of, in which there exists a genuine issue of material fact, which can be seen in the pleadings alone.
[DE 54, pg. 2]. Defendant cites no evidence whatsoever in support of this argument, and has, therefore, failed to meet its burden. Plaintiff’s motion as to Defendant’s First Affirmative Defense will be granted.
See how that works?

Note to litigants -- if you have more than ten affirmative defenses, you probably have two or three more than you really need.

8 comments:

  1. read the order. The plaitniff got sj on defendants, first, fifth, Seventy, and eight, affirmative defense. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Love the partial withdrawal of the defenses -

    Honey, I'm telling you...just the tip...I swear...just the tip.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Worst part is those aren't even affirmative defenses.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Which reminds me, hot tub and martini time! Living well is the best revenge.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Words to live by, Whacky.

    And you have persuaded me to pour a martini.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Defense Class you say? I thought it was something else..If you know what i mean

    ReplyDelete
  7. identify by yourself is worthy of my vote.

    <a href="http://quicker.dha-appraisals.com/>payday loans</a>

    [url=http://paydayonlinecash.co.uk/]instant payday loans[/url]

    ReplyDelete