IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF EL PASO COUNTY} 327TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT MOTT © ROBERTO PACHECO; ) ARIOSTO MANRIQUEZ; ) MANUEL PARRA; ) MARIA AGUILAR ) ALBINO GAYTAN PINA, Individually and ) as the Personal Representative of the Estate ) of TERESA LOZANO ACEVEDO, Deceased; ) LUZ MARIA GAYTAN LOZANO; ) JOSE GUADALUPE GAYTAN LOZANO; ) MARIA ELENA GAYTAN LOZANO; ) CLARA GAYTAN LOZANO; GLORTA ) GAYTAN LOZANO; JOSEFA MARQUEZ, ) OCANA, as Representative of the Estate of ) ) ; ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Cause No. 2005-8265 ASCENCION RAMIREZ CARAVEO, Deceased and For and on Behalf of the Heirs of ASCENCION RAMIREZ CARAVEO, Deceased; And MAGDALENO BORREGO-LARES vs, URIEL CHAVIRA, HERIBERTO FLORES-GARCIA, and/or LOS PAISANOS AUTOBUSES, INC. aka AUTOBUSES, L.P.I., MEXICO LINDO TRANSPORTATION, J8:J ENTERPRISE d/b/a FIRST CLASS d/b/a LOS CORRECAMINOS FINAL JUDGMENT BE IT REMEMBERED, that on November 29, 2010, came on to be heard the above- entitled and numbered cause, and Roberto Pacheco, Ariosto Manriquez, Manuel Parra, Maria Aguilar, Albino Gaytan Pina, Individually, and as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Teresa Lozano Acevedo, Deceased, Luz Maria Gaytan Lozano, Jose Guadalupe Gaytan Lozano, Maria Blena Gaytan Lozano, Clara Gaytan Lozano, Gloria Gaytan Lozano, Josefa Marquez Ocana, as Representative of the Estate of Ascencion Ramirez Caraveo, Deceased, and for and on Behalf of the Heirs of Ascencion Ramirez Caraveo, Deceased, and Magdaleno Borrego-Lares, Plaintiffs, appeared in person and by and through their attorneys of record and announced readyfor trial, and Uriel Chavira dba Mexico Lindo Transportation and Los Paisanos Autobuses, Inc. aka Autobuses, L,P.L., Defendants, appeared personally and by and through their attorneys of record and announced ready for trial, and a jury having been previously demanded, a jury of twelve good and lawful men and women, who being duly empanelled and sworn, and after hearing the opening statements, the evidence, the Charge of the Court and the arguments of counsel, retumed their verdict to the Court on the 3rd of December 2010, and no objection being made as to the receipt of the verdict, and no further request being made of the jury, the verdict was received by the Court and filed among the papers of this cause and the jury was discharged. ‘The jury found as follows: Question No. t Was Heriberto Flores-Garcia an agent of Uriel Chavira d/b/a Mexico Lindo and Los Paisanos on October 10, 2005 at the time of the accident? An “agent” is one who acts on behalf of another under the latter’s authority and for the latter's benefit, Answer! Yes_ Question No. 2 Was Heriberto Flores-Garcia acting in the scope of his agency on October 10, 2005 at the time of the accident? Heriberto Flores-Garcia is acting in the “scope of his agency” if he is acting in furtherance of the business of Uriel Chavira d/b/a Mexico Lindo and Los Paisanos. Answer: YesQuestion No. 3. Was Heriberto Flores-Garcia acting as an employee of Uriel Chavira d/b/a Mexico Lindo and Los Paisanos on October 10, 2005 at the time of the accident? Employee means any individual, other than an employer, who is employed by’ an employer and who in the course of his or her employment directly affects commercial motor vehicle safety. Such term includes a driver of a commercial motor vehicle (including an independent contractor while in the course of operating a commercial motor vehicle), a mechanic, and a freight handler. Answer: Yes Question No. 4 ‘Was Heriberto Flores-Garcia a ig in the scope of his employment on October 10, 20057 An “employee” is acting in the “scope of his employment” if he is acting in furtherance of the business of his employer. Answer: eee ee Question No. 5 Did the negligence, if any, of those named below proximately cause the deaths of Ascencion Ramirez Caraveo and Teresa Lozano Acevedo and injuries to Roberto Pacheco, Ariosto Manriquez, Manuel Parra, Maria Aguilar and Magdaleno Borrego-Lares? "Negligence", when used with respect to the conduct of Uriel Chavira d/b/a Mexico Lindo and Los Paisanos and Heriberto Flores-Garcia, means failure to use a “high degree of care”, that is, failing to do that which a very cautious, competent, and prudent person would have done under the same or similar circumstances or doing that which a very cautious, competent, and prudent person would not have done under the same or similar circumstances, “High degree of care", means that degree of care that would have been used by a very cautious, competent, and prudent person under the same or similar circumstances. A “Motor Carrier” must systematically inspect, repair and maintain, or cause to be systematically inspected, repaired, and maintained, all motor vehicles subject to its control. a. Los Paisanos and Uriel Chavira d/b/a Mexico Lindo Answer: Yes b. —_Heriberto Flores-Garcia Answer: Yes