SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN JOSE UNLIMITED JURISDICTION CASE NO.

Similar documents
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO CASE NO.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES. The plaintiff, David Lutz, by and through his counsel of record, Brett Dressler, Esq.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

Case 4:18-cv RGE-SBJ Document 1 Filed 02/20/18 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

Case 1:18-cv ECF No. 1 filed 06/20/18 PageID.1 Page 1 of 8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. ROBERT S AMERICAN GOURMET FOOD, INC., a domestic corporation; & JURY DEMAND

Pacer Service Center

COME NOW the plaintiffs JO ANN and MICHAEL SMITH, a married couple, by and. through their attorneys of record, MARLER CLARK LLP and FRANK JENKINS LAW

Case 1:18-cv PLM-PJG ECF No. 1 filed 09/20/18 PageID.1 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY. COMES NOW the plaintiff, Heather Tuttle, for a cause of action against defendant

STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT DODGE COUNTY BRANCH

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF CALHOUN. Plaintiff, Case No

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF CALHOUN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON CASE NO. COMPLAINT. Plaintiffs, (Personal Injury) Defendants.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION. ClassAction.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION

C01:13-cv LEK-KSC Document 1 Filed 11/19/13 Page 1 of 12 PagelD 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA NO. COMPLAINT

Case 3:15-cv JAH-NLS Document 1 Filed 09/14/15 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY AND UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES

DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF ELBERT, STATE OF COLORADO PO Box Ute St. Kiowa CO 80117

COMPLAINT PARTIES. 1. At all times relevant hereto, Mary Montour was a resident of Adams County, Colorado.

FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT

2:14-cv RMG Date Filed 02/25/14 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 2:16-cv BCW Document 2 Filed 12/02/16 Page 1 of 10

Case 5:16-cv JGB-KK Document 1 Filed 07/07/16 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:1

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Case 2:12-cv Document 1 Filed 06/08/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1

Case 3:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/22/18 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

COMPLAINT. COMES NOW the Plaintiffs, Christopher Cooper and Shelley Smith, by and through

Case 0:17-cv WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/13/2017 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.

Case No. Division COMPLAINT GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES WITH JURY DEMAND

ADDITIONAL COUNSEL FOR THE PEOPLE (CONTINUED FROM PRECEDING PAGE):

Case 3:17-cv Document 1 Filed 10/20/17 Page 1 of 40 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 3:10-cv B Document 1 Filed 09/10/10 Page 1 of 6 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Case 2:18-cv JAM-DB Document 1 Filed 05/11/18 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:16-cv Document 1 Filed 09/09/16 Page 1 of 41 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY TRENTON DIVISION

Question Farmer Jones? Discuss. 3. Big Food? Discuss. -36-

Case 3:16-cv Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 1 of 39 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY TRENTON DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION. Defendants. )

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE JOHN DOE EXETER HOSPITAL COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR PANEL AND CLASS ACTION CERTIFICATION

Case 3:17-cv SRU Document 1 Filed 08/21/17 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT. ADRIAN LOVELL, Civil Action No.

Case 2:12-cv JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 08/02/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATHENS DIVISION

Case 4:18-cv JAS Document 1 Filed 03/01/18 Page 1 of 45 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case3:05-cv WHA Document1 Filed02/14/05 Page1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 4:16-cv LLP Document 1 Filed 12/23/16 Page 1 of 25 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

vs Case 3:16-cv JPG-PMF Document 1 Filed 04/01/16 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #1 TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

STATE OF LOUISIANA PLAINTIFFS VERSUS

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION. Plaintiffs, Defendant.

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 08/09/18 Page 1 of 47 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE GREENEVILLE DIVISION

CAUSE NO TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PLAINTIFF S THIRD AMENDED PETITION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES UNLIMITED JURISDICTION. Case No:

SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/26/18 Page 1 of 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF WAYNE

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT **********

Case3:09-cv WHA Document48 Filed04/05/12 Page1 of 21

Case 3:13-cv GPM-PMF Document 5 Filed 02/14/13 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONROE COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 12/14/15 Page 1 of 49 PageID 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:18-cv JSC Document 1 Filed 05/02/18 Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY. COMES NOW Plaintiff against the above-named defendants, and states and alleges

Case 5:17-cv Document 2 Filed in TXSD on 01/17/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LAREDO DIVISION

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 09/06/18 Page 1 of 49 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

4. Plaintiff, Valerie Battle-Dugger, is an adult individual, residing at all times relevant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 4:08-cv RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA TUCSON DIVISION

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 08/23/16 Page 1 of 40 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

In the United States District Court for the District of Colorado

Case 3:17-cv Document 1 Filed 06/02/17 Page 1 of 46 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Strict Liability and Product Liability PRODUCT LIABILITY WARRANTY LAW

Case 3:10-cv REP Document 52 Filed 12/09/10 Page 1 of 17

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs,

Case 1:10-cv LJO-SKO Document 1 Filed 07/20/10 Page 1 of 21

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE DONALD W. LEMONS November 4, 2005 FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE Charles N.

Case 3:15-cv SMY-DGW Document 1 Filed 10/28/15 Page 1 of 46 Page ID #1

Case 3:14-cv BR Document 1 Filed 10/09/14 Page 1 of 7

Case 7:10-cv ART Document 1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 1 of 12

CAUSE NO CV ANNA DRAKER IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF VS. MEDINA COUNTY, TEXAS

Plaintiff, Deborah Fellner, by and through her counsel, Eichen Levinson & Crutchlow, LLP, hereby makes this claim against the Defendant as follows:

3:18-cv MGL Date Filed 07/31/18 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION

Transcription:

1 1 1 1 1 EUSTACE DE SAINT PHALLE, SBN 10 JOSEPH R. LUCIA, SBN 1 RAINS LUCIA STERN, PC 0 Montgomery Street, 1 th Floor San Francisco, CA Tel: (1) 1-1 Fax: () 0- E-mail: PersonalInjuryGroup@RLSlawyers.com WILLIAM D. MARLER (Pro Hac Vice pending) MARLER CLARK, LLP, PS 101 Second Avenue, Suite 00 Seattle, WA 1 Tel: (0) -1 Fax: (0) -1 Email: bmarler@marlerclark.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF DANIEL ESTRADA SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN JOSE UNLIMITED JURISDICTION 1 1 1 0 1 DANIEL ESTRADA, v. Plaintiffs, SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and DOES 1-0, inclusive, Defendants. CASE NO. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 st Cause of Action: Negligence nd Cause of Action: Strict Product Liability rd Cause of Action: Negligence Per Se th Cause of Action: Breach of Implied Warranty DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL COMES NOW the Plaintiff, DANIEL ESTRADA, by and through his counsel of record, EUSTACE DE SAINT PHALLE of RAINS LUCIA STERN, PC, and WILLIAM D. MARLER of MARLER CLARK, L.L.P., P.S., (pro hac vice pending) and alleges and complains as follows by way of his Complaint. 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1. The entirety of this Complaint is pled upon information and belief. Each allegation is likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery.. Plaintiff DANIEL ESTRADA purchased food and drink manufactured and sold by defendant SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO. at its 0 N. th Street location in San Jose, California. After consuming the food, plaintiff became sick. The food that defendant SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO. sold to plaintiff was contaminated by Shigella bacteria, causing his illness and injuries described below. PARTIES. At the time of the subject incident giving rise to his claims, DANIEL ESTRADA lived in the City of San Jose, in the County of Santa Clara, California.. Defendant SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO. is a California company with its principal place of business located at 0 North th Street, San Jose, CA. At all times relevant to this action, SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO. manufactured and sold food products within the State of California. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS Shigella. Shigella is a bacterium that can cause sudden and severe diarrhea (gastroenteritis) in humans. Shigellosis is the name of the disease that Shigella causes. The illness is also known as bacillary dysentery. Shigella bacteria can infect the intestinal tract after the ingestion of relatively few organisms. This is why shigellosis is the most communicable of the bacterial-induced diarrheas.. Shigella infection can be subclinical, but typically causes watery or bloody diarrhea with abdominal pain, fever, tenesmus, and malaise. Shigella is very infectious with just -0 organisms are sufficient to cause disease. Transmission occurs via the fecal oral route and can be spread by eating food prepared by an infected food handler or by direct person to person contact. Sexual transmission may also occur. Young children, the elderly, and HIV infected individuals with CD count < 00 are more likely to have severe symptoms including dehydration, bacteremia, and seizures.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1. The source of Shigella bacteria is the excrement (feces) of an infected individual that is ultimately ingested by another person. The infectious material is spread to new cases by person-to-person contact or via contaminated food or water. Approximately 0% of the nearly 0,000 cases of shigellosis that occur annually in the U.S are foodborne-related. Generally, the food preparer is the individual who contaminates the food, but food may also become contaminated during processing. Contamination of drinking water by Shigella is a problem that more often occurs in the developing world, but swimming pools and beaches in the U.S. can become contaminated by infected individuals. No group of individuals is immune to shigellosis, but certain individuals are at increased risk, particularly small children. Persons infected with HIV experience shigellosis much more commonly than other individuals. Shigella Outbreak at Marisco s San Juan Restaurant. According to a Public Health Warning, on Saturday afternoon, October 1, 01, the Santa Clara County Public Health Department was notified by a local hospital of patients with fever and diarrhea who had all eaten at the same restaurant. Subsequent case finding has revealed a total of over two dozen individuals with fever and diarrhea who ate at Mariscos San Juan restaurant (0 N. th Street) in downtown San Jose on Friday October 1 or Saturday October 1. The restaurant was closed on the morning of Sunday, October 1, 01 and remains closed.. Of the ill persons, over a dozen have tested positive for Shigella by PCR, and one has a blood culture growing Shigella sonnei; almost all of the reported cases have required hospital admission, and 1 are in intensive care. There are other individuals who were seen and not admitted or who were ill but did not seek medical attention. The number of ill individuals sickened in this outbreak has reached at least. Daniel Estrada s Illness. Daniel Estrada purchased and consumed food at the defendant s restaurant located at 0 N. th Street, San Jose, California, on or about Saturday, October 1, 01.. During the day on Monday, October 1, 01, Mr. Estrada began to experience body aches. He believed that he was becoming ill with a common flu. Late that same night, however, he began to experience severe gastrointestinal symptoms, including chills, fever, diarrhea and abdominal cramps. 1. On Tuesday morning, October 0, Mr. Estrada saw his primary physician, who directed

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 him to get to the emergency department (ED) at Good Samaritan hospital immediately for treatment. The physician called the ED, and ED personnel were waiting for Mr. Estrada to assist him when he arrived. At the ED over the course of the day, Mr. Estrada was treated with antibiotics and intravenous fluids for his severe dehydration. He was kept isolated, given his likely infectious state, until the time of discharge around :00 PM the same day. 1. Since being discharged, Mr. Estrada continues to suffer from the effects of his Shigellosis illness, which was proximately caused by his consumption of Shigella-contaminated food manufactured and sold by the defendant on October 1, 01. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENCE (Against Defendants SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and DOES 1-0) 1. By this reference, paragraphs 1 through 1 of this Complaint are fully incorporated as if each and every one of these paragraphs was set forth here in its entirety. 1. Defendants were negligent in manufacturing, distributing and selling food products that were not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided, including but not limited to the warning that the food product may contain Shigella, and thus should not be given to, or consumed by, people. 1. Defendants had a duty to comply with all statutory and regulatory provisions that pertained or applied to the manufacture, distribution, storage, labeling, and sale of food products, including, but not limited to, California s Sherman Food, Drug and Cosmetic Laws and the California Health and Safety Code, which bans the manufacture, sale and distribution of any adulterated food. Defendants failed to do so. Plaintiff was among the class of persons designed to be protected by the statutory and regulatory provisions pertaining to the defendants manufacture, distribution, storage, labeling and sale of their food. 1. Defendants had a duty to use supplies and/or raw materials in producing the food product which were in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances and regulations, which were from safe and reliable sources, which were clean, wholesome and free from spoilage and adulteration, and which were safe for human consumption, but failed to do so. Defendants also had a duty to consumers of their products to produce their products using reasonable care, but breached this duty as

well. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1. Defendants were negligent in the selection of their material and ingredient suppliers, or other subcontractors, and failed to adequately supervise them, or provide them with adequate standards in writing, and as a result, purchased and used products contaminated with Shigella. 1. More specifically, defendants owed a duty to properly supervise, train, and monitor their employees, or the employees of their agents or subcontractors, in the preparation of the products it sold, doing so to ensure compliance with the each defendant s own specifications and performance standards, as well as to ensure compliance with all applicable health regulations, including the FDA s Good Manufacturing Practices regulations, 1 C.F.R. Part 1, Subparts (A)-(G). Defendants breached all of these duties, and plaintiff was injured as a direct and proximate result of such breaches. 0. Under applicable state law, food is adulterated if it contains a poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health. Shigella is such a substance. Thus, by either manufacture, distribution, storage, or sale of the subject product or the subject product s ingredients, defendants breached their statutory and regulatory duties, and plaintiff was injured as a direct and proximate result of such breaches. 1. Defendants breached the aforementioned duties as alleged above, which breach constituted the proximate cause of injury to the plaintiff.. As a result of the defendants negligence, the plaintiff suffered severe and permanent personal injuries, as well as economic loss.. The plaintiff has suffered general and special, incidental and consequential damages, as the direct and proximate result of the acts and/or omissions of the defendants as set forth above, which damages shall be fully proven at the time of trial, including, but not limited to, damages for loss of enjoyment of life, both past and future; medical and medical related expenses, both past and future; wage and economic loss, past and future; emotional distress, and future emotional distress; medical and pharmaceutical expenses, past and future; and other ordinary, incidental and consequential damages as would be anticipated to arise under the circumstances. Wherefore, Plaintiff DANIEL ESTRADA prays for judgment against Defendants SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 DOES 1-0, as set forth below. /// SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION STRICT LIABILITY CLAIM Violation of California s Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Laws, California Health and Safety Code, et seq. (Against Defendants SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and DOES 1-0). By this reference, paragraphs 1 through of this Complaint are fully incorporated as if each and every one of these paragraphs was set forth here in its entirety.. Defendants are in the business of manufacturing and selling food and drink products, including the contaminated food product that is at issue herein.. Defendants manufactured and sold food that was defective at the time it left defendants control in that it was contaminated with Shigella, which rendered it adulterated, unwholesome and injurious to health and unfit for human consumption. This defective condition created an unreasonable risk to people such as the plaintiff.. Defendants sold the food products used by plaintiff knowing the products would be used by plaintiff without inspection for defects.. It was reasonably foreseeable to defendants that the contaminated food, when put to its reasonably foreseeable use, would expose people such as the plaintiff to harm.. Defendants prepared, distributed and sold food that was adulterated and contaminated with Shigella bacteria, by which the food was rendered adulterated, unwholesome and injurious to health, in violation of California s Sherman Food, Drug and Cosmetic Laws, California Health and Safety Code sections, et seq. and particularly section 10, and similar federal health and safety standards and regulations. 0. Plaintiff utilized the contaminated food product as anticipated by defendants when he consumed it. As a proximate cause of plaintiff s use of the products in a fashion anticipated by the defendants, plaintiff suffered injury and damages as described herein. Plaintiff was injured by his consumption of contaminated, which was adulterated, contaminated, unwholesome, injurious to his health and unfit for human consumption.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1. The plaintiff has suffered general and special, incidental and consequential damages, as the direct and proximate result of the acts and/or omissions of the defendants as set forth above, which damages shall be fully proven at the time of trial, including, but not limited to, damages for loss of enjoyment of life, both past and future; medical and medical related expenses, both past and future; wage and economic loss, past and future; emotional distress, and future emotional distress; medical and pharmaceutical expenses, past and future; and other ordinary, incidental and consequential damages as would be anticipated to arise under the circumstances. Wherefore, Plaintiff DANIEL ESTRADA prays for judgment against Defendants SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and DOES 1-0, as set forth below. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENCE PER SE Violation of California s Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Laws, California Health and Safety Code, et seq. (Against Defendants SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and DOES 1-0). By this reference, paragraphs 1 through 1 of this Complaint are fully incorporated as if each and every one of these paragraphs was set forth here in its entirety.. Defendants were negligent in manufacturing, distributing and selling food products that were not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided, including but not limited to, the warning that the food product may contain Shigella and thus, should not be given to, or eaten by, people.. The defendants each additionally owed a duty to comply with statutory and regulatory provisions that pertained or applied to either the import, manufacture, distribution, storage, or sale of their product or product-ingredients, including, but not limited to, California s Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, CA Health & Safety Code 1, which bans the manufacture, sale and distribution of any adulterated food. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act, 0(a), as codified at 1 U.S.C. (a) also provides the standard for the manufacture, sale and distribution of any adulterated food.. Under applicable state law, food is adulterated if it contains a poisonous or deleterious substance, which may render it injurious to health. Shigella is such a substance. Thus, by either

manufacture, distribution, storage, or sale of the subject product, defendants breached their statutory and regulatory duties, and the plaintiff was injured as a direct and proximate result of such breaches.. The defendants negligent acts and omissions included, but were not limited to: (a) Failure to prevent the contamination of the product by Shigella, including the failure to implement or non-negligently perform inspection and monitoring of the product such that its adulterated condition would be discovered prior to its sale or distribution to the public for human consumption. (b) Failure to properly supervise, train, and monitor their employees, or the employees 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 of their agents or subcontractors, on how to ensure the manufacture, distribution or sale of food product free of adulteration by potentially lethal pathogens.. The state food safety regulations applicable here, and as set forth above, establish a positive and definite standard of care in the import, manufacture, distribution or sale of food, and the violation of these regulations constitutes negligence per se.. The plaintiff was in the class of persons intended to be protected by these statutes and regulations, and was injured as the direct and proximate result of the defendants violation of applicable state and local food safety regulations.. The defendants breached the aforementioned duties as alleged above, which breach constituted the proximate cause of injury to plaintiff. 0. The plaintiff has suffered general and special, incidental and consequential damages, as the direct and proximate result of the acts and/or omissions of the defendants as set forth above, which damages shall be fully proven at the time of trial, including, but not limited to, damages for loss of enjoyment of life, both past and future; medical and medical related expenses, both past and future; wage and economic loss, past and future; emotional distress, and future emotional distress; medical and pharmaceutical expenses, past and future; and other ordinary, incidental and consequential damages as would be anticipated to arise under the circumstances. Wherefore, Plaintiff DANIEL ESTRADA prays for judgment against Defendants SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and DOES 1-0, as set forth below.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 /// /// FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY (Against Defendants SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and DOES 1-0) 1. By this reference, paragraphs 1 through 0 of this Complaint are fully incorporated as if each and every one of these paragraphs was set forth here in its entirety.. Defendants impliedly warranted that the contaminated food product was of merchantable quality, and was safe and fit for human consumption. Plaintiff purchased and consumed the food product, and reasonably relied upon the skill and judgment of defendants as to whether the products were of merchantable quality and fit for human consumption.. Defendants breached these implied warranties in that defendants food products were contaminated with Shigella. As a direct, legal and proximate result of the breach of implied warranties, plaintiff suffered and may continue to suffer injury, harm, special damages and economic loss.. The plaintiff has suffered general and special, incidental and consequential damages, as the direct and proximate result of the acts and/or omissions of the defendants as set forth above, which damages shall be fully proven at the time of trial, including, but not limited to, damages for loss of enjoyment of life, both past and future; medical and medical related expenses, both past and future; wage and economic loss, past and future; emotional distress, and future emotional distress; medical and pharmaceutical expenses, past and future; and other ordinary, incidental and consequential damages as would be anticipated to arise under the circumstances. Wherefore, Plaintiff DANIEL ESTRADA prays for judgment against Defendants SERGIO BECERRA CRUZ and LOURDES GARCIA BECERRA dba MARISCOS SAN JUAN NO., and DOES 1-0, as set forth below. WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays as follows: PRAYER FOR RELIEF (1) That the court award plaintiffs judgment against each of the defendants, jointly and severally liable, in such sums as shall be determined to fully and fairly compensate plaintiffs for all general,

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 special, incidental and consequential damages incurred, or to be incurred, by plaintiffs as the direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of the defendants; incurred; () That the court award plaintiffs their costs, disbursements and reasonable attorneys fees () That the court award plaintiffs the opportunity to amend or modify the provisions of this complaint as necessary or appropriate after additional or further discovery is completed in this matter, and after all appropriate parties have been served; and circumstances. () That the court awards such other and further relief as it deems necessary and proper in the JURY TRIAL DEMANDED. Dated: October 1, 01 Respectfully submitted, EUSTACE DE SAINT PHALLE, SBN 10 JOSEPH R. LUCIA, SBN 1 RAINS LUCIA STERN, PC 0 Montgomery Street, 1 th Floor San Francisco, CA Tel: (1) 1-1 Fax: () 0- E-mail: PersonalInjuryGroup@RLSlawyers.com WILLIAM D. MARLER (Pro Hac Vice pending) MARLER CLARK, LLP, PS 101 Second Avenue, Suite 00 Seattle, WA 1 Tel: (0) -1 Fax: (0) -1 Email: bmarler@marlerclark.com Attorneys for Plaintiff DANIEL ESTRADA