state of new mexico › files › filed.complaint.pdf · 2020-04-04 · d-202-cv-2012-11346 andrea...
TRANSCRIPT
STATE OF NEW MEXICO COUNTY OF BERNALILLO SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT ALAN RUHGA and STEPHEN PAULSEN, Plaintiffs,
v. No.: __________________________ AMANDEEP SINGH, AJAIB SINGH, a/k/a AJAIB SINGH MALHI, SARBJIT DHUDWAL, GURPREET SINGH, HARJIT SINGH GILL, GURPREET SINGH d/b/a CUSTOM CARRIERS, GURPREET SINGH CORPORATION, HSD TRUCKING, INC., d/b/a HSD TRUCKING, H.S.D TRANSPORT LLC, AJAIB SINGH d/b/a COMMANDER TRUCKING, AJAIB SINGH MALHI d/b/a COMMANDER TRUCKING, and COMMANDER TRANSPORT INC., d/b/a COMMANDER TRANSPORT. Defendants.
COMPLAINT TO RECOVER COMPENSATORY AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURIES FROM NEGLIGENT OPERATION OF A COMMERCIAL
MOTOR VEHICLE, RECKLESS OPERATION OF A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE, NEGLIGENT HIRING, TRAINING, SUPERVISION, AND RETENTION,
NEGLIGENT OPERATION OF A TRUCKING COMPANY, RECKLESS OPERATION OF A TRUCKING COMPANY, RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR, VICARIOUS LIABILITY,
ALTER EGO, JOINT VENTURE, CIVIL CONSPIRACY, AND FRAUDULENT TRANSFER
Plaintiffs, Alan Ruhga and Stephen Paulsen, by and through counsel of record, Law
Office of Matthew Vance, P.C. (Matthew Vance) and for their Complaint states as follows:
I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. Plaintiff Alan Ruhga is a resident of Modesto, California.
2. Plaintiff Stephen Paulsen is a resident of Granite Bay, California.
3. Defendant Amandeep Singh, on information and belief, is a resident of Fremont,
California.
FILED IN MY OFFICEDISTRICT COURT CLERK
12/10/2012 3:55:39 PMGREGORY T. IRELAND
D-202-CV-2012-11346
Andrea Salas
4. Defendant Ajaib Singh (a/k/a Ajaib Singh Malhi), on information and belief, is a
resident of Yuba City, California.
5. Defendant Sarbjit Dhudwal, on information and belief, is a resident of Chehalis,
Washington.
6. Gurpreet Singh, on information and belief, is a resident of Citrus Heights,
California.
7. Harjit Singh Gill, on information and belief, is a resident of Yuba City, California.
8. Upon information and belief and at the times material hereto, Gurpreet Sigh d/b/a
Custom Carriers was a business entity operating as an interstate trucking company and registered
with the Department of Transportation under DOT #1832382.
9. At the times material hereto, Gurpreet Sigh d/b/a Custom Carriers, has owned or
operated commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New Mexico or is authorized to
operate commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New Mexico.
10. Upon information and belief and at the times material hereto, Gurpreet Singh
Corporation was a corporation registered with the State of California, with a primary business
location in California, but conducting business across the United States as or in joint venture
with Custom Carriers, including the State of New Mexico, related to interstate trucking.
11. Upon information and belief and at all times material hereto, Gurpreet Singh is
the President of Gurpreet Singh Corporation and acted within the course and scope of his
employment and/or agency relationship.
12. Upon information and belief and at the times material hereto, HSD Trucking Inc.,
d/b/a HSD Trucking is a business entity with an address of 1137 Leonard Court, Yuba City,
2
California, and operating as an interstate trucking company. HSD Trucking Inc. is registered
with the Department of Transportation under DOT #785607.
13. At the times material hereto, HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, has owned
and operated commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New Mexico or is
authorized to operate commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New Mexico.
14. Upon information and belief, HSD Trucking Inc., is a corporation registered with
the State of California, with a primary business location at 1137 Leonard Court, Yuba City,
California, 95933, but conducting business across the United States as or in joint venture with
H.S.D Transport LLC, including the State of New Mexico, related to interstate trucking.
15. Upon information and belief and at the times material hereto, H.S.D Transport
LLC is a limited liability company registered with the State of California, with a primary
business location at 1137 Leonard Court, Yuba City, California, 95933, but conducting business
across the United States as or in joint venture with HSD Trucking Inc. (a/k/a HSD Trucking),
including the State of New Mexico, related to interstate trucking.
16. Upon information and belief and at the times material hereto, Ajaib Singh, d/b/a
Commander Trucking is a business entity operating as an interstate trucking company and
registered with the Department of Transportation under DOT #1998117.
17. At the times material hereto, Ajaib Singh, d/b/a Commander Trucking DOT
#1998117, has operated commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New Mexico or
is authorized to operate commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New Mexico.
18. Upon information and belief and at the times material hereto, Ajaib Singh Malhi,
d/b/a Commander Trucking is a business entity operating as an interstate trucking company and
registered with the Department of Transportation under DOT #2265374.
3
19. At the times material hereto, Ajaib Singh Malhi, d/b/a Commander Trucking
DOT #2265374, has operated commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New
Mexico or is authorized to operate commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New
Mexico.
20. Upon information or belief and at all times material hereto, Commander Transport
Inc., is a corporation registered with the State of California, with a primary business location
Yuba City, California, but conducting business across the United States, including the State of
New Mexico, related to interstate trucking.
21. Upon information and belief and at all times material hereto, Harjit Singh Gill is
the President of Commander Transport Inc. and acted within the course and scope of his
employment and/or agency relationship.
22. Upon information and belief and at the times material hereto, Commander
Transport Inc., d/b/a Commander Transport is a business entity operating as an interstate
trucking company and registered with the Department of Transportation under DOT #1674419.
23. At the times material hereto, Commander Transport Inc. DOT #1674419, has
operated commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New Mexico or is authorized to
operate commercial motor vehicles on the roads of the State of New Mexico.
24. The vehicle crash which gives rise to Plaintiffs’ claims hereunder occurred in the
County of Bernalillo, State of New Mexico.
25. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action.
26. Venue is proper in this Court.
II. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS
4
27. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
28. Plaintiffs have brought the present action against Defendants to hold them
responsible and accountable for their individual actions, as well as, their collective actions as part
of a business enterprise.
29. All Defendants, at all times material to the present action, were engaged in the
interstate trucking industry across the United States, including within the State of New Mexico,
and have acted in concert as part of a joint venture, civil conspiracy, or broader organization.
30. Plaintiffs’ claims arise from a vehicle crash which occurred on June 3, 2010, in
the City of Albuquerque, County of Bernalillo, State of New Mexico.
31. The crash occurred on Interstate 40, eastbound, at approximately milepost 148.
32. The crash occurred at about 3:20 p.m.
33. At the time of the crash weather and road conditions were dry and clear.
34. Alan Ruhga and Stephen Paulsen were driving eastbound on Interstate 40 in a
tractor-trailer unit.
35. Amandeep Singh was also driving eastbound on Interstate 40 in a tractor-trailer
unit.
36. At the time material hereto, Amandeep Singh’s commercial motor vehicle was in
a position behind the commercial motor vehicle occupied by Alan Ruhga and Stephen Paulsen.
37. Traffic ahead of both commercial motor vehicles slowed and stopped for traffic
ahead on the roadway.
38. Alan Ruhga slowed and stopped the commercial motor vehicle in which he and
Stephen Paulsen were riding.
5
39. Alan Ruhga engaged his 4-way hazards flashers.
40. Amandeep Singh failed to notice the stopped traffic ahead in time.
41. Amandeep Singh failed to notice the 4-way flashers ahead in time.
42. Amandeep Singh crashed his commercial motor vehicle into the back of the
tractor-trailer unit occupied by Alan Ruhga and Stephen Paulsen.
43. Officer Jose Urbano, of Albuquerque Police Department, investigated the crash
and its causes.
44. Officer Jose Urbano completed a State of New Mexico Uniform Crash Report
following his investigation and recording his observations.
45. Officer Jose Urbano’s report records that Amandeep Singh was operating a
tractor-trailer displaying a Department of Transportation identification number of 785607.
46. HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking is assigned and operates under
Department of Transportation identification number of 785607.
47. Officer Jose Urbano’s report records that Amandeep Singh was operating a
vehicle on the roads of New Mexico insured by Praftorian [sic] Insurance Company with a
policy number of P0009108913.
48. At the times material hereto, Custom Carriers, (Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom
Carriers) was insured under a policy of insurance with Praetorian Insurance Company under
policy number P0009108913.
49. Officer Jose Urbano’s report records that the carrier name associated with the
commercial motor vehicle operated by Amandeep Singh was Ajaib Singh.
50. Officer Jose Urbano’s report records that the address for the carrier, Ajaib Singh,
was 735 Lask, Yuba City, California 95993.
6
51. Officer Jose Urbano’s report records that Amandeep Singh was operating a
commercial motor vehicle on the roads of New Mexico owned by Ajaib Singh.
52. Officer Jose Urbano’s report records the address for owner Ajaib Singh was 735
Lask, Yuba City, California 95993.
53. Officer Jose Urbano’s report records the phone number for owner Ajaib Singh
was 530-682-6390.
54. The primary phone number for HSD Trucking Inc. (a/k/a HSD Trucking) is 530-
682-6370.
55. Amandeep Singh told Officer Jose Urbano that he tried to stop but he could not
do so in time because his load was too heavy.
56. Amandeep Singh told Officer Jose Urbano that he could not avoid hitting the
commercial motor vehicle occupied by Alan Ruhga and Stephen Paulsen and hit it.
57. Amandeep Singh was driving too fast for the conditions in existence on the
roadway.
58. Amandeep Singh was driving too fast given the weight of his load.
59. Amandeep Singh’s load was too heavy.
60. Amandeep Singh’s truck was overloaded.
61. Amandeep Singh failed to keep a proper look out.
62. Amandeep Singh was following too closely.
63. Amandeep Singh, at all times material hereto, was an employee, contractor or
agent of Defendant Custom Carriers (DOT #1832382).
64. In the alternative, Amandeep Singh, at all times material hereto, was an employee,
contractor or agent of Defendant Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers.
7
65. In the alternative, Amandeep Singh, at all times material hereto, was an employee,
contractor or agent of Defendant Gurpreet Singh Corporation.
66. In the alternative, Amandeep Singh, at all times material hereto, was an employee,
contractor or agent of Defendant HSD Trucking Inc. d/b/a HSD Trucking (DOT #785607).
67. In the alternative, Amandeep Singh, at all times material hereto, was a partner,
employee, contractor or agent of Defendant H.S.D Transport LLC.
68. As a direct result of the impact, the commercial motor vehicle in which Plaintiffs
were riding was damaged.
69. As a direct result of the impact, the commercial motor vehicle which Amandeep
Singh was operating was damaged.
70. As a direct result of the impact, Plaintiffs were violently jolted about within their
vehicle.
71. As a direct result of the crash, Plaintiffs suffered physical injuries.
72. As a direct result of the crash, Plaintiff Alan Ruhga has suffered life-long, painful,
and disabling injuries.
73. As a direct result of the crash, Plaintiffs incurred reasonable and necessary
medical expenses.
74. As a direct result of the crash, Plaintiffs experienced pain and suffering.
75. As a direct result of the crash, Plaintiffs experienced a loss of enjoyment of life.
76. As a direct result of the crash, Plaintiffs experienced loss of income and/or loss of
earning capacity.
77. As a direct result of the crash, Plaintiffs suffered other damages to be proven at
trial.
8
78. Defendants Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, Gurpreet Singh Corporation,
HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D Transport LLC, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander
Trucking, Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking, and Commander Transport Inc., d/b/a
Commander Transport are all inter-related businesses or alter egos of one another because of one
of more of the following:
a) they share common owner/operators,
b) they share common corporate officers,
c) they share common partners,
d) they share common members of board of directors,
e) they share or have common employees,
f) they share or have common drivers,
g) they share trucks and equipment,
h) they share common offices,
i) they share common facilities,
j) they share common phone numbers,
k) employees of one defendant company conduct the business of other defendant
companies, and
l) they have other financial ties or connections which demonstrate a joint venture,
civil conspiracy, or that they are alter egos of one another.
79. At times material hereto, Ajaib Singh has been an employee, agent, or officer of
Commander Trucking, (DOT #1998117).
80. Ajaib Singh is the same person as Ajaib Singh Malhi.
9
81. At times material hereto, Ajaib Singh, a/k/a Ajaib Singh Malhi, has been an
employee, agent, or officer of Commander Transportation, (DOT #2265374).
82. At times material hereto, Ajaib Singh, a/k/a Ajaib Singh Malhi, has been an
employee, agent, or officer of Commander Transport, Inc., (DOT #1674419).
83. At times material hereto, Ajaib Singh, a/k/a Ajaib Singh Malhi, has operated the
same commercial motor vehicle for Commander Transportation, (DOT #2265374), and for
Commander Transport, Inc., (DOT #1674419).
84. At times material hereto, Sarbjit Dhudwal has been an agent, employee, or officer,
of Custom Carriers, (DOT #1832382).
85. At times material hereto, Sarbjit Dhudwal has been an officer, employee, agent, or
officer of HSD Trucking Inc., (DOT #785607).
86. At times material hereto, Sarbjit Dhudwal has been an officer, employee, agent, or
officer of H.S.D Trucking LLC.
87. Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers has conducted business at 1137 Leonard
Court, Yuba City, California 95993.
88. Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers retained records at 1137 Leonard Court,
Yuba City, California 95993.
89. Sarbjit Dhudwal has resided at 1137 Leonard Court, Yuba City, California 95993.
1137 Leonard Court, Yuba City, California 95993 is a residential address.
90. Sarbjit Dhudwal has conducted the business of Custom Carriers at 1137 Leonard
Court, Yuba City, California 95993.
91. Sarbjit Dhudwal has conducted the business of HSD Trucking Inc., a/k/a HSD
Trucking, at 1137 Leonard Court, Yuba City, California 95993.
10
92. Sarbjit Dhudwal is the agent for service of process for HSD Trucking, Inc., with a
listed agent address of 1137 Leonard Court, Yuba City, California 95993.
93. Sarbjit Dhudwal is the agent for service of process for H.S.D Transport LLC, with
a listed agent address of 1137 Leonard Court, Yuba City, California 95993.
Sarbjit Dhudwal has also used the name of or been known by Sarbjit Singh.
94. In the alternative and upon information and belief, Sarbjit Dhudwal, Ajaib Singh,
HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D Transport LLC, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander
Trucking, Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking, or Commander Transport Inc., d/b/a
Commander Transport are successors in interest to Defendants Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom
Carriers and Gurpreet Singh Corporation.
III. NEGLIGENCE (Defendant Amandeep Singh)
95. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
96. Defendant Amandeep Singh was driving a commercial motor vehicle on Interstate
40 at the time of the crash.
97. At all time material hereto, Defendant Amandeep Singh, a professional driver,
owed a duty to Plaintiff, as well as other motorists, to exercise reasonable care in the operation of
the commercial motor vehicle which he was operating.
98. Defendant Amandeep Singh failed to exercise reasonable care under the
circumstances in the manner or method of his driving, which resulted in the vehicle crash.
99. As a direct and proximate result Defendant Amandeep Singh’s breach of the duty
owed to Plaintiffs and others, Defendant Amandeep Singh caused, in whole or in part, the crash
which resulted in damages to Plaintiffs, including but not limited to compensatory damages past
11
and future medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, past and future loss of
enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning capacity, damages of nature, extent,
and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
IV. NEGLIGENCE PER SE (Defendant Amandeep Singh)
100. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
101. Defendant Amandeep Singh owed a duty to follow local and federal law while
operating a commercial motor vehicle.
102. By acts, errors and omission in his driving or in regard to the maintenance or
servicing of the tractor-trailer he was driving, at all times material hereto, Defendant Amandeep
Singh violated numerous county, state, local, and federal laws. Defendant Amandeep Singh’s
violations include but are not limited to;
a) Failure to maintain a proper lookout,
b) Driver inattention,
c) Following too closely,
d) Driving in a careless manner, and
e) Driving with too heavy of a load.
103. Defendant Amandeep Singh violated the aforementioned applicable traffic laws
and generally drove in a negligent manner.
104. As a direct and proximate result Defendant Amandeep Singh’s violation of the
aforementioned legal duties, Defendant Amandeep Singh caused, in whole or in part, the vehicle
crash which resulted in damages to Plaintiffs, including but not limited to compensatory damages
past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, past and future loss of
12
enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning capacity, damages of nature, extent,
and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
V. PUNITIVE DAMAGES (Defendant Amandeep Singh)
105. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
106. Upon information and belief, Amandeep Singh was operating his commercial
motor vehicle in a reckless manner and/or in knowing violation of local, state, and federal laws
and safety regulations.
107. Amandeep Singh’s recklessness included, but is not limited to, driving a poorly
maintained and unsafe vehicle, driving in violation of hours in service, driving an overloaded
vehicle, and driving in a reckless manner.
108. Amandeep Singh’s conduct in the present incident warrants an award of punitive
damages to punish Amandeep Singh and serve as a specific and general deterrent.
VI. VICARIOUS LIABILITY (Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking, Sarabjit Dhudwal, Custom
Carriers and/or HSD Trucking Inc., H.S.D Transport LLC) 109. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
110. Upon information and belief and at all times material hereto, Defendant
Amandeep Singh was an employee, contractor or agent of Defendants Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh
d/b/a Commander Trucking, Sarabjit Dhudwal, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, HSD
Trucking Inc., and/or H.S.D Transport LLC.
111. Amandeep Singh, at all times material hereto, was acting within the course and
scope of his employment with Defendants Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking
13
Sarabjit Dhudwal, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, HSD Trucking Inc., and/or H.S.D
Transport LLC, was working under the control of Defendant and in furtherance of the legitimate
business activities of Defendants.
112. Based upon federal laws and regulations, based upon principles of respondeat
superior, and theories of agency, Defendants Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander
Trucking Sarabjit Dhudwal, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, HSD Trucking Inc., and/or
H.S.D Transport LLC., are vicariously liable for the actions or inactions of Amandeep Singh.
113. Further, Defendants Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking
Sarabjit Dhudwal, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, HSD Trucking Inc., and/or H.S.D
Transport LLC., approved or authorized or ratified the negligent or reckless conduct of
Amandeep Singh.
VII. NEGLIGENT HIRING, TRAINING, SUPERVISION AND RETENTION (Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, and/or Gurpreet Singh
Corporation)
114. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
Upon information and belief and at all times material hereto, Defendant Amandeep Singh
was an employee, contractor or agent of Defendants Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a
Custom Carriers, and/or Gurpreet Singh Corporation.
115. Defendants Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, and/or
Gurpreet Singh Corporation were negligent in hiring, contracting of, training, supervision and
retention of Defendant Amandeep Singh.
116. Defendants Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, and/or
Gurpreet Singh Corporations’ negligence includes but it not limited to:
14
a. Inadequate screening of Defendant Amandeep Singh as a perspective
employee, independent contractor, or professional driver of a commercial motor
vehicle;
b. Inadequate management, training, and enforcement of policies regarding
vehicle operation and maintenance;
c. Placement or retention of Defendant Amandeep Singh as a vehicle or
tractor-trailer operator; and/or
d. Inadequate supervision of Defendant Amandeep Singh.
117. As a proximate result of Defendants Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a
Custom Carriers, and/or Gurpreet Singh Corporation’s negligence in hiring, contracting with,
training, supervision and retention of Defendant Amandeep Singh, Plaintiff suffered damages
including but not limited to compensatory damages past and future medical expenses, past and
future pain and suffering, past and future loss of enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income
or earning capacity, damages of nature, extent, and duration, and other damages to be proven at
trial.
VIII. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, NEGLIGENT HIRING, TRAINING, SUPERVISION AND RETENTION
(Sarabjit Dhudwal, HSD Trucking Inc. d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D Transport LLC)
118. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
119. In the alternative, Amandeep Singh, at all times material hereto, was an employee,
contractor or agent of Defendants HSD Trucking Inc. d/b/a HSD Trucking (DOT #785607),
Sarabjit Dhudwal, and/or H.S.D Transport LLC.
15
120. Defendants HSD Trucking Inc. d/b/a HSD Trucking (DOT #785607), Sarabjit
Dhudwal, and/or H.S.D Transport LLC., were negligent in hiring, contracting of, training,
supervision and retention of Defendant Amandeep Singh.
121. Defendants HSD Trucking Inc. d/b/a HSD Trucking (DOT #785607), Sarabjit
Dhudwal, and/or H.S.D Transport LLC.’s negligence includes but it not limited to:
a. Inadequate screening of Defendant Amandeep Singh as a perspective
employee, professional driver, or independent contractor;
b. Inadequate management, training, and enforcement of policies regarding
vehicle operation and maintenance;
c. Placement or retention of Defendant Amandeep Singh as a vehicle or
tractor-trailer operator; and/or
d. Inadequate supervision of Defendant Amandeep Singh.
122. As a proximate result of Defendants HSD Trucking Inc. d/b/a HSD Trucking
(DOT #785607), Sarabjit Dhudwal, and/or H.S.D Transport LLC.’s negligence in hiring,
contracting with, training, supervision and retention of Defendant Amandeep Singh, Plaintiffs
and suffered damages, including but not limited to compensatory damages past and future
medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, past and future loss of enjoyment of life,
past and future loss of income or earning capacity, damages of nature, extent, and duration, and
other damages to be proven at trial.
IX. NEGLIGENCE (Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking)
123. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
16
124. Defendant Ajaib Singh is identified as the owner of the commercial motor vehicle
operated by Amandeep Singh at the time of the subject crash.
125. Upon information and belief, Defendants Ajaib Singh and/or Ajaib Singh d/b/a
Commander Trucking, owned or leased or otherwise had a possessory interest in the commercial
motor vehicle driven by Amandeep Singh at the time of the subject vehicle crash.
126. As owner, leasor, or possessor of the vehicle, Defendants Ajaib Singh, Ajaib
Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking owed a duty of ordinary care and/or pursuant to local, state or
federal law, to maintain and ensure the safe operation of the vehicle.
127. Defendant Ajaib Singh breached his duty of ordinary care and/or his duty
pursuant to local, state, or federal law, including but not limited to:
a) entrustment of the commercial motor vehicle to Amandeep Singh,
b) hiring, training, supervising, and retaining Amandeep Singh,
c) maintenance of the commercial motor vehicle,
d) loading of the commercial vehicle,
e) licensing or permitting of the commercial motor vehicle,
f) training or supervision of Amandeep Singh, and
g) otherwise acting, encouraging, or failing to prevent Amandeep Sign from
violating local, state, and federal statutes and regulations, including but not limited to 49 C.F.R.
§§ 350 to 399.
128. As a proximate result of Defendants Ajaib Singh’s and/or Ajajib Singh d/b/a
Commander Trucking’s negligence in their obligations of ownership, possessory interest, and
maintenance, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including but not limited to compensatory damages
past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, past and future loss of
17
enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning capacity, damages of nature, extent,
and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
X. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, NEGLIGENCE (HSD Trucking Inc. d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D. Transport LLC, Sarabjit
Dhudwal)
129. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
130. Defendant HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, is identified by reference to
DOT #785607 in Officer Jose Urbano’s Uniform Crash Report, recording the DOT number
under which Amandeep Singh was operating the commercial motor vehicle.
131. Upon information or belief and in the alternative, Defendants HSD Trucking Inc.,
d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D Transport LLC, and/or Sarabjit Dhudwal owned or leased or
otherwise had a possessory interest in the commercial motor vehicle driven by Amandeep Singh
at the time of the subject vehicle crash.
132. As owner, leasor, or possessor of the vehicle, Defendants HSD Trucking Inc.,
d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D Transport LLC, and/or Sarabjit Dhudwal owed a duty of ordinary
care and/or pursuant to local, state or federal law, to maintain and ensure the safe operation of
the vehicle.
133. Defendants HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D Transport LLC,
and/or Sarabjit Dhudwal breached its/their duty of ordinary care and/or its duty pursuant to local,
state, or federal law, including but not limited to:
a) entrustment of the commercial motor vehicle to Amandeep Singh,
b) maintenance of the commercial motor vehicle,
c) loading of the commercial motor vehicle,
18
d) licensing or permitting of the commercial motor vehicle,
e) training or supervision of Amandeep Singh, and
f) otherwise acting, encouraging, or failing to prevent Amandeep Sign from
violating local, state, and federal statutes and regulations, including but not limited to 49 C.F.R.
§§ 350 to 399.
134. As a proximate result of Defendant HSD Trucking Inc.’s, d/b/a HSD Trucking
H.S.D Transport LLC’s, and/or Sarabjit Dhudwal’s negligence in its obligations of ownership,
possessory interest, and maintenance, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including but not limited to
compensatory damages past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, past
and future loss of enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning capacity, damages
of nature, extent, and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
XI. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, NEGLIGENCE (Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, Gurpreet Singh
Corporation)
135. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
136. Insurance company and policy number providing coverage to Amandeep Sign at
the time of the crash were associated with a policy held by Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom
Carriers.
137. Upon information or belief and in the alternative, Defendants Gurpreet Singh,
Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers and/or Gurpreet Singh Corporation, owned or leased or
otherwise had a possessory interest in the commercial motor vehicle driven by Amandeep Singh
at the time of the subject vehicle crash.
19
138. As owner, leasor, or possessor of the vehicle, Defendants Gurpreet Singh,
Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers and/or Gurpreet Singh Corporation owed a duty of
ordinary care and/or pursuant to local, state or federal law, to maintain and ensure the safe
operation of the vehicle.
139. Defendants Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers and/or
Gurpreet Singh Corporation breached its/their duty of ordinary care and/or its duty pursuant to
local, state, or federal law, including but not limited to:
a) entrustment of the commercial motor vehicle to Amandeep Singh,
b) maintenance of the commercial motor vehicle,
c) loading of the commercial vehicle,
d) licensing or permitting of the commercial motor vehicle,
e) training or supervision of Amandeep Singh, and
f) otherwise acting, encouraging, or failing to prevent Amandeep Sign from
violating local, state, and federal statutes and regulations, including but not limited to 49 C.F.R.
§§ 350 to 399.
140. As a proximate result of Defendants Gurpreet Singh’s, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a
Custom Carriers’s and/or Gurpreet Singh Corporation’s negligence in its/their obligations of
ownership, possessory interest, and maintenance, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including but not
limited to compensatory damages past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and
suffering, past and future loss of enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning
capacity, damages of nature, extent, and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
XII. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, NEGLIGENCE (Sarbjit Dhudwal)
20
141. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
142. At all times material hereto, Defendant Sarbjit Dhudwal was the dispatcher for
Custom Carriers (DOT # 1832382) and/or was an employee or agent of HSD Trucking Inc.,
d/b/a HSD Trucking.
143. As part of his responsibilities for one or more of the Defendants, Sarbjit Dhudwal
dispatched or provided Amandeep Singh with the commercial motor vehicle which he was
driving at the time of the crash.
144. Sarbjit Dhudwal owed a duty of reasonable care in dispatching and/or providing
Amandeep Singh with a commercial motor vehicle.
145. Defendant Sarbjit Dhudwal breached his duty of ordinary care and/or its duty
pursuant to local, state, or federal law, including but not limited to:
a) entrustment of the commercial motor vehicle to Amandeep Singh,
b) maintenance of the commercial motor vehicle,
c) loading of the commercial vehicle,
d) dispatching of the commercial motor vehicle,
e) training or supervision of Amandeep Singh, and
f) otherwise acting, encouraging, or failing to prevent Amandeep Sign from
violating local, state, and federal statutes and regulations, including but not limited to 49 C.F.R.
§§ 350 to 399.
146. As a proximate result of Defendant Sarbjit Dhudwal negligence in its obligations
of ownership, possessory interest, and maintenance, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including but
not limited to compensatory damages past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and
21
suffering, past and future loss of enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning
capacity, damages of nature, extent, and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
XIII. PUNITIVE DAMAGES (Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking, Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh
d/b/a Custom Carriers, Gurpreet Singh Corporation, HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, Sarabjit Dhudwal, H.S.D Transport LLC)
147. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
148. The actions of Defendants Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking,
Gurpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, Gurpreet Singh Corporation, HSD
Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, Sarabjit Dhudwal, H.S.D Transport LLC demonstrate a
conscious disregard for the rights and safety of Plaintiffs and other motorists.
149. Defendants Ajaib Singh, Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking, Gurpreet
Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, Gurpreet Singh Corporation, HSD Trucking Inc.,
d/b/a HSD Trucking, Sarabjit Dhudwal, H.S.D Transport LLC acted in such a reckless, willful,
and wanton manner as to justify an award of punitive and exemplary damages against them in an
amount to punish them for their egregious behavior and to deter others from acting in a like
manner in the future.
XIV. ALTER EGO AND CIVIL CONSPIRACY (All Defendants)
150. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
151. All Defendants set up, owned, operated, or otherwise participated in (including
but not limited to, as corporate officers, board members, principles, partners, employees,
independent contractors, drivers or otherwise) multiple and/or successive business enterprises
engaged in interstate trucking.
22
152. Defendants Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, Gurpreet Singh Corporation,
Sarabjit Dhudwal, HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D Transport LLC, Ajaib Singh,
Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking, Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking, and
Commander Transport Inc., d/b/a Commander Transport are all inter-related businesses or alter
egos of one another because of one of more of the following: they share common
owners/operators, they share common corporate officers, they share common partners, they share
common members of board of directors, they share or have common employees, they share or
have common drivers, they share trucks and equipment, they share common offices, they share
common facilities, they share common phone numbers, employees of one defendant company
conduct the business of other defendant companies, and they have other financial ties or
connections which demonstrate a joint venture, civil conspiracy, or that they are alter egos of one
another.
153. A conspiracy existed between all Defendants.
154. The purpose of the conspiracy was to engage in the business of interstate trucking
for profit.
155. The conspirators, by explicit agreement or concerted action, sought to increase
profits while knowingly or recklessly avoiding safety obligations under the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Act.
156. The purpose or motive behind the actions of Defendants was to place profits
ahead of safety, and to avoid safety obligations under local, state and federal law.
157. As a matter of practice Defendants placed profits ahead of safety, were cited on
numerous occasions for safety violations by local and federal authorities, sought to avoid liability
23
for crashes, and fines imposed by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration for safety
violations.
158. The businesses set up, owned, operated, or otherwise participated in by all
Defendants had a practice and reputation of violating Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations,
including but not limited to, log book violations, hours of driving violation, false or duplicate log
books, and poor or no maintenance of owned or operated commercial motor vehicles.
159. The businesses set up, owned, operated, or otherwise participated in by all
Defendants were or are notorious for their poor safety rating with the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration.
160. The businesses set up, owned, operated, or otherwise participated in by all
Defendants were operated recklessly.
161. The purpose behind the business entities and corporations was improper and
fraudulent.
162. Specific acts were carried out by one or more of the Defendants in furtherance of
the conspiracy.
163. As a proximate result of the actions of all Defendants in their business operations
and their conspiracy together, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including but not limited to
compensatory damages past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, past
and future loss of enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning capacity, damages
of nature, extent, and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
24
XV. JOINT VENTURE (All Defendants)
164. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
165. Defendants Armandeep Singh, Ajaib Singh (a/k/a Ajaib Singh Malhi), Gurpreet
Singh, Gurpreet Singh d/b/a Custom Carriers, Gurpreet Singh Corporation, Sarbjit Dhudwal,
Harbjit Singh Gill, HSD Trucking Inc., d/b/a HSD Trucking, H.S.D Transport LLC, Ajaib Singh
d/b/a Commander Trucking, Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking, and Commander
Transport Inc., d/b/a Commander Transport are all inter-related businesses engaged in the
commerce of interstate trucking.
166. All Defendants worked together to perform a common purpose of operating a
business or engaging in the business of interstate trucking.
167. All Defendants had a proprietary interest in the ongoing business enterprises.
168. All Defendants had mutual rights of control, shared in the profits, and had a duty
to share in the losses.
169. Defendants shared business assets, business locations, phone numbers, equipment
and personnel.
170. As a proximate result of the actions of all Defendants in their negligent and
reckless business operations and their conspiracy together, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including
but not limited to compensatory damages past and future medical expenses, past and future pain
and suffering, past and future loss of enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning
capacity, damages of nature, extent, and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
25
XVI. NEGLIGENCE BY ALTER EGO, CO-CONSPIRATORY DEFENDANTS (Commander Transport Inc., Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking)
171. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
172. Defendants Commander Transport Inc. and Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander
Trucking as alter egos of the other defendants or as co-conspirators with the other defendants
owed duties of reasonable care pursuant to basic industry standards, local, state and federal law
in regard to their operations, including participation in interstate trucking.
173. Defendants Commander Transport Inc. and Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander
Trucking as alter egos of the other defendants or as co-conspirators with the other defendants
owed a duty of ordinary care and/or pursuant to local, state or federal law, to maintain and ensure
the safe operation of the involved commercial motor vehicle.
174. Defendants Commander Transport Inc. and Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander
Trucking as alter egos of the other defendants or as co-conspirators with the other defendants
breached their duty of ordinary care and/or their duty pursuant to local, state, or federal law,
including but not limited to:
a) hiring, training, supervising, and retaining Amandeep Singh and other
employees,
b) entrustment of the commercial motor vehicle to Amandeep Singh,
c) maintenance of the subject commercial motor vehicle,
d) loading of the subject commercial vehicle,
e) licensing or permitting of the commercial motor vehicle,
f) training or supervision of Amandeep Singh, and
26
g) otherwise acting, encouraging, or failing to prevent Amandeep Sign from
violating local, state, and federal statutes and regulations, including but not limited to 49 C.F.R.
§§ 350 to 399.
175. Further and in particular regard, Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking is
an alter ego of Ajaib Singh and Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking.
176. As a proximate result of Defendants’ Commander Transport Inc. and Ajaib Singh
Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking negligence in their obligations of ownership, possessory
interest, and maintenance, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including but not limited to compensatory
damages past and future medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, past and future
loss of enjoyment of life, past and future loss of income or earning capacity, damages of nature,
extent, and duration, and other damages to be proven at trial.
XVII. PUNITIVE DAMAGES (All Defendants)
177. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
178. All Defendants, individually, collectively, and as co-conspirators, acted with
reckless, wanton, willful disregard for the rights and safety of others.
179. The businesses set up, owned, operated, or otherwise participated in by all
Defendants were operated with reckless disregard to the rights and safety of others, including but
not limited to Plaintiffs and other motorists.
180. Defendants’ conduct warrants an award of punitive damages to punish Defendants
and serve as a specific and general deterrent.
27
XVIII. SUCCESSOR LIABILITY (Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking)
181. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs as though fully set
forth herein.
182. Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking is the successor business and mere
continuation of Ajaib Singh and Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking and is therefore
responsible for all liabilities owed by Ajaib Singh and Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking
and Amandeep Singh, and for all injuries sustained by Plaintiffs.
183. Ajaib Singh Malhi d/b/a Commander Trucking’s purchase or transfer of Ajaib
Singh’s or Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking’s assets was a de facto merger and assumed
Ajaib Singh’s and/or Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander Trucking’s obligations and therefore
responsibilities for all liabilities owed by Ajaib Singh and/or Ajaib Singh d/b/a Commander
Trucking, and Amandeep Singh for all injuries and damages caused Plaintiffs.
WHEREFORE Plaintiffs respectfully request relief from the Court as follows:
1. For Judgment of the Court against Defendants in an amount sufficient to
compensate Plaintiffs for the injuries and damages suffered in and as a result of the vehicle crash
complained of herein, including but not limited to, compensatory damages past and future
medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, past and future loss of enjoyment of life,
past and future loss of income or earning capacity, damages of nature, extent, and duration, and
other damages to be proven at trial.
2. For an award of punitive damages sufficient to serve as a specific deterrent to
Defendants and as a general deterrent to deter others from acting in a similar reckless fashion.
28
29
3. For an award of pre-judgment interest on all sums determined to be due Plaintiffs
from date of the Complaint until paid in full.
4. For all of Plaintiffs’ costs incurred herein to be reimbursed by Defendants.
5. For all such other and additional relief as the Court may deem appropriate in these
circumstances.
Respectfully submitted,
Law Office of Matthew Vance, P.C.
/s/ Matthew Vance By: Matthew Vance Attorney for Plaintiffs 1000 Second Street NW Albuquerque, NM 87102 (505) 242-6267 [email protected]