STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ry) cRY THE GE Ft OTS "SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION COUNTY OF BUNCOMBE ve 1 RENO: 22-608:3616 tv 29 P STONE SMATHERS, by and through Richard) Nordan, Esq. as Guardian ad Litem; gi. 969..0.8.6 ASHLEY SMATHERS, individually an 3 pecan nat gandan of Sere Shes — and ZEBULON SMATHERS, individually and) as parent and natural guardian of Stone Smathers, DEFENDANT MH MISSION HOSPITAL, LLLP'S MOTION TO STRIKE, MOTIONS TO DISMISS, DEFENSES AND ANSWER TO INTIFFS' COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, HCA HEALTHCARE, INC: MH MASTER HOLDINGS, LLLP; MH HOSPITAL MANAGER, LLC; and MH MISSION HOSPITAL, LI Defendants NOW COMES Defendant MH Mission Hospital, LLLP (hereinafter "Answering Defendant"), by and through the undersigned counsel, and asserts the following Motions and defenses tothe Plaintiffs’ Complaint and responds to the Plaitffs” Complaint as follows: MOTION TO STRIKE Now comes the Answering Defendant, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP, and moves the Court pursuant to Rule 12() of the Rules of Civil Procedure to strike paragraphs 160 through 180 Cnelusive) of the Plaintiffs’ Complaint. In support ofthis Motion the Answering Defendant shows the Court thatthe allegations in these paragraphs are no related to the transaction and occurrence that isthe subject ofthe Paintifs’ “First Claim for Relief, which isthe only claim forreliet stated jn the Complaint. The allegations contained in paragraphs 160 through 180 of the Complaint are not relevant to the Plaintiffs" single claim for relief and should be stricken. Therefore, the ‘Answering Defendant requests thatthe allegations contained in paragraphs 160 through 181 of the Complaint be stricken by the Cour. MOTION TO DISMISS Rule 9j) Cony I it is determined that Plaintiffs have failed to comply with Rule 9(). Answering Defendant, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP, moves to dismiss the Complaint with prejudice underRules 9G), 12(bM6), and 56. In the event that Plaintiffs have failed 0 comply with Rule 9), ‘Answering Defendant, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP, asserts all applicable statutes of limitations. MOTION To Dismiss Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction Pursuant toN.C. Gen, Stat. § 14-1, Rule 12(6)(1), Answering Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiffs? Complaint ad all claims against Answering Defendant on the grounds thatthe Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action, in thatthe immunity conferred by the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act, N.C. Gen. Stat, §§ 90.21.130~ 134, bars this ation. MOTION TO Dismiss Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Pursuant toN.C. Gen, Stat. § 14-1, Rule 12(6)(1), Answering Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint and all claims against Answering Defendant on the grounds thatthe Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Answering Defendant, in that the immunity confetred by the [Emergency ot Disaster Treatment Protection Act, N.C. Gen, Stat. §§ 90.21.130 ~ 134, bars this action MOTION TO pisMIss Failure to Sate a Claim Parsuant to N.C. Gen, Stat, § 14-1, Rule 12(6)(6), Answering Defendant moves to dis Plaintiffs Complaint and all claims against Answering Defendant on the grounds that Plants ‘Complaint fails to state claim upon which relief may be granted, in that the immunity conferred by the Emergeney or Disaster Treatment Protection Act, N.C, Gen. Stat. §§ 90.21.130 +134 bars this action FIRST DEFENSE, Compliance with NiC. Gen, Stat. §90-21.12 {All health care provided by MH Mission Hospital, LLLP’s employees and agents was in aceordace with the standards of practice among members ofthe same health care professions with similar training and experience in similar communities under similar eircumstances a the time of the events giving rise to this lawsuit. Because the Plaintiffs eannot establish that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP deviated from the standard of health car, as that term is used in N.C, Gen, Stat. § 0-21.12, the Plaintiffs cannot recover from this Answering Defendant In addition, the obsteticians and obstetrical advanced healthcare providers (AHPs) that provided care to the Plaintiff Ashley Smathers were not employees, agents, or apparent agents of MH Mission Hospital, LLLP, and for that reason Mission Hospital cannot be lible for their acts or omissions. None of the obstetricians or obstetrical AHPs that are referenced inthe answers 10 the allegations of the Plaintiffs" Complaint were employees, agents, or apparent agenis of the Answering Defendant. Rs somes‘SECOND DEFENSE, Scope of Nursing Practice The Answering Defendant hereby asserts that any theory of liability against the Answering, Defendant based on the setions of its employed nurses must be based on the seope of practice for those nurses, as that scope of practice is defined by the North Carolina General Statutes and the North Carolina Administrative Code, To the extent the Plaintiff Complaint is premised on duties that would require the nurses to exceed their scope of practice, those theories of liability must ail as a matter of law, ‘THIRD DEFENSI Lack of Proximate Cause ‘An essential element of the Plaintiffs" cause of action against the Answering Defendant is the element of proximate cause. The Plaintiffs cannot establish that an act or omission by an ‘employee or agent of the Answering Defendant was a proximate cause of any injury or damages. to the Plains, ‘COVID Immunity ‘The events giving rise to this lawsuit occurred from March 19 to March 21, 2020, shortly after the COVID-19 pandemic spread to Western North Caroline. That pandemic affected every aspect of our healtheare system, both directly and indiectly, and March 2020 was a time of extraordinary tension and uncertainty for healthcare providers. Because ofthat uncertainty andthe ‘demands the COVID-19 pandemic placed on healthcare providers, our legislature unanimously enacted N.C.GSS. § 90-21.133, which protects healthcare providers like MH Mission Hospital LLLP and its employees from liability for good-faith erors that occurred while providing health care that was impacted by the COVID pandemic. MH Mission Hospital, LLLP is entitled to immunity under N.C.GS. § 90-21.133 because: (1) the events in question occurred during the COVID-19 emergency declaration; (2) the provision of health care by MH Mission Hospital, LLLP was impacted by the COVID-I9 pandemic; and (3) MH Mission Hospital, LLLP was providing health care in good faith. FIFTH DEFENS! Defense of Punitive Damages Cla Any allegations or claims for punitive damages do not comply with the pleading requirements ofN.C. Gen, Stat, §1A-1, Rule 9) in that Plaintiffs failed to aver aggravating factors supporting said allegations or claims, and the same should thus be dismissed. Answering Defendant gives notice, pursuant to N.C. Gen, Stat. § 1D-30, that it will sek bifurcation of issues related to compensatory damages and punitive damages a the trial ofthis action. In dition, to the extent Plaintiffs’ claims for punitive damages are frivolous and malicious, Answering Defendant asserts it is entitled to recovery of is attorney's fees pursuant to N.C. Gea, Stat § [D+ 45,Answering Defendant asserts that any attempt to recover punitive damages by Paints in this action violates Answering Defendan' stale and federal constitutional rights and the same is pled as bar fo the ability of Plaintiffs to recover punitive damages inthis action RESERVATION TO SERVE ADDITIONAL DEFENSES The Answering Defendant reserves the right to raise and assert any additional defenses that ‘may become apparent through discovery andlor at tial Introductory Note: The Answering Defendant isa covered entity as tha term is defined Within the regulatory lramework implementing the Heath Insuranee Portability and Accountability Act (hereinalter “HIPAA. The Answering Defendant notes that protective order as defined by 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e) has not been entered in this action, The Answering Defendant also notes that the US. Department of Health, & Human Serviees states that while a covered entity may diselose protected health infor (PHP? as part of defending litigation, the covered entity “must make reasonable to limit stich uses and diselosures to the minimum necessary to accomplish the i purposes.” hus:/iniew hs gow/hipaorfor-professionalsfay!70d/may-a-covered. twse-provected-healihnyformasion-for-iigation nde. hum Thhe “minim necessary” standard is contained within 45 C.F.R. § 16450246. In this pleading, the Answering Defendant has taken reasonable efforts to comply with the minimum necessary standard. Is because of the minimum necessary standard that many ‘of the answers to tho allegations of the Complaint refer to the medical record ot involved parties. ANSWER TO ALLEGATIONS IN COMPLAINT NOW COMES the Answering Defendant and responds to the specific allegations of the Plaintifs' Complaint as follows: 1, DENIED. 2, _ [tis ADMITTED that Plaintiff Ashley Smathers (hereinafter sometimes refered 10 as “Plainif) was admitted by her personal obstetrician to the labor and delivery unit of the ‘Answering Defendant on 19 March 2020. It is ADMITTED that the medical record of that admission is in writing and speaks for itself. It is DENIED thatthe Plaintiffs’ Complaint accurately and fully deseribes the circumstances of that admission and for that reason, except as specifically ‘admitted herein, the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 3, ADMITTED upon information and belief.4, ADMITTED upon information and belief. 5, __ Upon information and belie the medical record regarding the Plainti's prenatal care is in writing and speaks for itself It is ADMITTED upon information and belief that Plaintiff personally selected the obstetricians and other licensed independent practitioners that provided: obstetrical cae, including prenatal eare, to the Plaintiff, It is ADMITTED that an obstetician selected by the Plaintiff admitted Plaintiff to Hospital on ot about 19 March 2020. It is ADMITTED that an obstetrician performed a history and physical on the PlaimfT and documented his findings in the medical rocord of the Plaintiff. It is ADMITTED that certain nurses were involved in the eae ofthe Plaintiff and that those nurses followed the instructions and onlers of the obstetricians and obstetrical advanced healtheare practitioners (“AHPS") selected by the Plainif, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 6, __ Ibis ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician instructed Plaintiff to hegin pushing at around 9:25 pm, Ibis ADMITTED that even though Plaintiff's obstetrician anticipated a vaginal delivery when she instructed Plaintiff to begin pushing, a vaginal delivery did not occur and instead PlaintiT Stone Smathers was delivered via cesarean section by Plaintfl’s obstetrician. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 7. It is ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician and obstetrical AHPs evaluated Plain at multiple intervals on 20 March 2020 and documented those evaluations inthe medical record ofthe Plaintiff, That medical record of the PlaintfTisin writing and speaks for itself: Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 8. Its ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician at around 11:15 p.m. on 20 March 2020 discussed with Plaintiff the risks and benefits of a cesarean section, It is DENIED that PlaintfP's obstetrician ordered a "sta", “cmergent", or “emergeney” cesarean section for Paintif Except as specifically admitted in this paragraph the allegations are DENIED. 9. Itis DENIED that Plainif’s attending physician ordered a “sat”, “emergent”, ot “emergency” cesarean section forthe Plaintiff. In addition to providing care to tne Pain, the Plaintiff's attending obstetrician had other patients she was caring for atthe same time she was providing care to Plaintiff. There were also other patients on the labor and delivery unt that received operative care based on determinations made by those patients’ attending obstetricians. The allegations in this paragraph are, therefore, DENIED. 10. _ It is ADMITTED that the delivery of Plaintiff Stone Smathers occured via cesarean section on or about 3:54 am. on 21 March 2020. tis ADMLTTED that the cesarean delivery of Stone Smathers was performed by Plaintiff's obstetrician. Except as specifically admitted herein, the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 1, DENIED. 12, DENIED. 13. ADMITTED upon information and belie14. ADMITTED upon information and belief 15, ADMITTED upon information and belief 16. ‘The allegations inthis paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 17. The allegations inthis paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, th allegations are DENIED. 18, ‘The allegations inthis paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED, 19, The allegations in this paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant, 1 the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 20, The allegations in this paragraph are not directed 1o the Answering Defendant, To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 21, The allegations in this paragraph are not directed tothe Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 22, The allegations in this paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 23, The allegations in this paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 24. The allegations in this paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 25. The allegations in this paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is tequired fiom the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED, 26. The allegations in this paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, th allegations are DENIED, 27. The allegations in this paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED, 28, The allegations in this paragraph are not directed to the Answering Defendant. To the extent # response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations ate DENIED, 29, The allegations in this paragraph are not directed 10 the Answering Defendant. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. saga30, ADMITTED. 31. It is ADMITTED that Chad Patrick has been the CEO of MH Mission Hospital LLLP since July 2019. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 32. ADMITTED. 33. lig ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owns, operates, manages, and makes administrative and business decisions for Mission Hospital, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 34, Ibis ADMITTED that at all times relevant to this lawsuit, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP was healtheare provider engaged in the business of operating hospital and providing hospital facilities and services to its patients, including Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers. Except ws specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 35. IL is ADMITTED that atthe times relevant to this action, MH Mission Hospital. LLLP held itself out to the public as offering a wide array of hospital facilities and services at Mission Hospital and truthfully advertised the quality of the health care provided at Mission Hospital. Except as specifically admitted herein te allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 36. Its ADMITTED that atthe times relevant to this action, MH Mission Hospital LLLP field itself out to the public as offering a wide array of hospital facilities and services at Mission Hospital and truthfully advertised the quality of the health care provided at Mission Hospital. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph ate DENIED. 37. _ It ig ADMITTED that atthe times relevant to this action, MH Mission Hospital LLLP held itself out tothe public as offering a wide array of hospital facilities and services at Mission Hospital and truthfully advertised the quality of the health care provided at Mission Hospital. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 38 It is ADMITTED that atthe times relevant to this action, Answering Defendant acted through its employees and agents tis DENIED thatthe obstetricians and obstetrical AHP involved in Plaintf’s care were employees or agents or apparent agents of the Answering Defendant. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 39, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact, For this reason they do not require a response. To the extent a response is required the contentions are DENIED. 40, It is ADMITTED that atthe times relevant to this action, MH Mission Hospital LLLP acted through its employees and agents. Through its employees and agents, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP had a healtheare-provider‘o-patient relationship with its patients, including Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers. Because of that relationship, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP. sneer‘owed Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and itdid comply with the standards of practice. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED, 41, Its ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and ‘Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did eomply with the standards of practice. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 42, Itis ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 43. Its ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED, 44. It is ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 45. ILis ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED, 46. It is ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in tis paragraph are DENIED. Sonathers and 47, _ It is ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashi Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 48.__It is ADMITTED that atthe times relevant to this ation, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP acted through its employees. Those employees complied with the standards of practice Except as specifielly admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 49, IL ig ADMITTED that atthe times relevant to this action, MH Mission Hospital LLLP acted through its employees. Those employees complied withthe standards of practice, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. sone50, It is ADMITTED that atthe times relevant to this aetion, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP acted through its employees. Those employees complied with the standards of practice. [Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 31. ADMITTED. 52. ADMITTED. 53. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact, For this reason they do not requite a response. However, o the extent a response is required the contentions in this paragraph are DENIED, 54, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of act, Fr this reason they do not require @ response. However, it i ‘ADMITTED that this lawsuit is a medical malpractice action as that term is defined in NCGS. § '90-21.11(). Except as specifically admitted herein, the contentions in this paragraph are DENIED. 55, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact. For this reason they do not require a response, However, to the exten a response is requited the contentions in this paragraph are DENIED. 56. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, tot assertions of fact, For this reason they do not require a response. However, i is ADMITTED that this lawsuit is a medical malpractice action as that tem is defined in NCGS. § 90-21.11(2). Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 57. The preceding responses are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth hetein, 58. ADMITTED, upon information and belief, 59. Upon information and belie, the medical record regarding the Plainti’s prenatal cares in waiting and speaks for itself, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraphs are DENIED. 60. Upon information and belief, dhe medical record regarding the Plantif?'s prenatal ‘are isin writing and speaks for itself. Except as specifically admitted rein the allegations in tis paragraph are DENIED. 61, DENIED 62. Itis ADMITTED that Plaintf’s obstetrician and obstetrical AHP determined that she was 40 weeks of gestation and that those providers made the decision to initiate the induction of labor. Its ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician admitted Plaintiff to Mission Hospital on 19 March 2020, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph ane DENIED.63, fis ADMITTED upon information and beliet that Plaintiff personally selected the “obstetricians and other licensed independent practitioners that provided obstetrical care, ineluding prenatal ete, 10 the Plaintiff. I is ADMITTED that an obstetrician selected by the Plaimtitt ADMITTED Plainttl to Hospital on or about 19 March 220. It is ADMITTED that Plant's obstetricians and obstettical AHPs made the decision to induce Plainsf?'s labor and medically ‘managed that labor. Except as specifically admitted the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIE 64, Tis ADMITTED upon information and belief that Plainif personally selected the obstetricians and other licensed independent practitioners that provided obstetrical car, including, prenatal care, to the Plaintiff. It is ADMITTED that an obstetrician selected by the Plant? ADMITTED Plaintiff to Hospital on or about 19 March 2020. It is ADMITTED that PlantfT's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs made the decision to induce Plaintf?s labor and medically ‘managed that labor. It s ADMITTED that certain nurses employed by the Answering Defendant were involved in the care that was being directed by the Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical APs. Except as specifically admitted the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 65, The medical record of the Plaintiff is in writing and speaks for itself. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED, 66, tis DENIED that the Answering Defendant was negligent and for that reason the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 67. The medical record of the Plaintiff is in writing and speaks for itself: Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 68, It is DENIED that AROM occurred at 8:45 pam. on 19 March 2020. It is ADMITTED upon information and belief that Plaintiffs personally selected the obstetrician that placed a cervical ripening balloon around 8:45 p.m, on 19 March 2020. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 69, It is ADMITTED that Plaintiff's personally selected obstetrician performed the artificial rupture of membrane procedure. It is ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetricians and ‘obstetrical AHPs were aware of when AROM occurred. It ig ADMITTED upon information and belief that Plainsif's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs made decisions about the course of Plaintif’s treatment based on multiple factors, including when AROM occurred. Except as specifically admited herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 70, It is ADMITTED that the Answering Defendant, by and through the nurses ‘employed by the Answering Defendant, had a duty to comply with the standards of practice as that term s defined in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-21.12 and itis further ADMITTED thet the nurses employed by the Answering Defendant in fat complied with the applicable standards of practice. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 71. Tis ADMITTED thatthe Plaintf's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs order the ‘administration of Pitocin to the Plaintiff. It is ADMITTED that the Plaintif’s obstetricians and somes) 10‘obstetrical AHPs monitored and were aware of the amount of Pitoein that they had ordered for the Plaintiff. [eis ADMITTED that the nurses emplayed by the Answering Defendant administered Pitovin as ordered by the Plaintiff's obstetscians and obstetrical AHPs. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED, 72. tig ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs ordered Pitocin for the purpose of stimulating active labor by stimulating and increasing the strength of uterine contractions. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 73. Ihis ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHP ordered the administration of Pitocin to the Plaintiff. ¢ is ADMITTED thatthe Plaintiffs obstetricians and ‘obstetsical AHPs monitored and were aware ofthe amount of Ptocin that they had ordered forthe Plaintf. Ie is ADMITTED upon information and belief that the Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs considered the risks and benefits of Pitocin administration in their care and {ueatment of Plaintiff. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED, 74, tis ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs ordered the administration of Pitocin tothe Plaintif. It is ADMITTED that the Plaintif's obstetricians and ‘obstetrical AHPs monitored ané were aware ofthe amount of Ptocin that they had ordered forthe Plainsif. t is ADMITTED upon information and belief that the Plaintif?s obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs considered the risks and benefits of Pitocin administration in their care and tweatment of Plaintiff. Except as specifically admitted herein te allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 75. Itis ADMITTED that the Plaintif’s obstetricians and obstetrical AHDPs ondered the administration of Pitocin to the Plain. It ig ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs monitored and were aware of the amount of Pitocin that they had ordered for the Plaintiff. It is ADMITTED upon information and belief that the Plainif’s obstetricians and obstetrical APs considered the risks and benefits of Pitocin administration in their care and tueatment of Plaintiff. Itis ADMITTED thatthe nurses employed by the Answering Defendant timely and appropriately communicated information about Plants condition to her obstetricians and obstetrical APs, Except as ADMITTED herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED, 76, Iti ADMITTED thatthe Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs ordered the administration of Pitocin tothe Plaintiff tis ADMITTED thatthe Plaintiffs obstetricians and ‘obstetrical AHPs monitored and were aware ofthe amount of Pitocin that they had ordered fo the Plain and the amount that Plaintiff had received, tis ADMITTED upon information and belie that the Plaintiffs obstetricians and obstetrical AHS considered the risks and benefits of Pitocin administration, It is ADMITTED thatthe nurses employed by the Answering Defendant timely and appropriately communicated information about Plaintifl’s condition to her obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs, including information related to the Pitocin that was ordered by Plaintif's| ‘obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs. Except as ADMITTED herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED.77. Wis ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHP ordered the administration of Pitoein to the Plaintiff, [tis ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetricians and ‘obstetrical AHPs monitored and were aware ofthe amount of Pitocin that they had ordered forthe Plaintiff andthe aroun that Plaintiff had received. Its ADMITTED upon information and belie that the Painif's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs considered the risks and benefits of Ptocin administration. It is ADMITTED that any increases in Pitocin were done pursuant tothe orders of the PlaintifPs obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations ofthis paragraph are DENIED. 78, The Plaintiff's medical record, including the fetal heat tracing, isin writing and speaks for itself. tis ADMITTED that Plaintiff's personally selected obstetrician reviewed the fetal heart tracing ator near the time stated inthis allegation and made no changes to the medical plan of care. Itis ADMITTED that the Plaitif?'s personally selected obstetrician documented het assessment of Plaintiff which assessment was made ator near the time relevant to this allegation, ‘That evaluation by Plaintf's personaly selected obstetrician is contained in the medical record, is in writing and speaks for itself. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 79. Itis ADMITTED that an TUPC was placed on or about 11:05 A.M. on 20 March 2020. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in ths paragraph are DENIED. 80. Itis ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs ordered the administration of Pitocin to the Plaintiff. I ig ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs monitored and were aware of the amount of Pitocin that they had ordered forthe Plain and the amoust that Plaintiff bad received, is ADMITTED upon information and belie that the Plaintf’s obstetricians and obstetrical AHPs considered the risks and benefits of Ptocin ‘administation in making medical decisions for Plaintiff. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 81, _It is ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetrician prepared a progress note related to her evaluation ofthe Plaintiff. That progress note is pat of the medical record, sin writing and speaks for itso. Itis DENIED, upon information and belief, that Plaintiff's obstetrician remained atthe hospital afer 5:00 P.M. for the reasons stated in this paragraph. IL is ADMITTED that the ‘obstetrician identified in this paragraph remained at Hospital uni at least 7:19 p.m. on 20 March 2020 and continued to provide and direct the medical and obstetrical care ofthe Plaintiff. Except ‘as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph aze DENIED. 82.__Itis ADMITTED upon information and belief that Plaintf?'s obstetrician evaluated the Plaintiff at around 7:00 p.m. on 20 March 2020. It is ADMITTED that Plaintif’s obstetrician prepared an entry in Plaintif’s medical record related to this evaluation. It is DENIED that Plaintif?’s obstetrician described the fetal heart twacing as is descried inthis allegation and for ‘that reason this allegation is DENIED. Except as specifically admitted herein, the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED, 83. Ib is ADMITTED that between 7:00 and 8:00 p.m, on 20 March 2020 there was a change in Plaintiff's attending obstetrician, The obstetrician that began caring forthe PlaintifT on : 2‘or about 7:00 p.m, on 20 March 2020 was not an employee or agent ofthe Answering Defendant It is ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetrician that began providing Plainif's medical ere around 7:00 p.m. on 20 March 2020 prepared a progress note of her evaluation of the Plainti at around 9:11 pam That progress note is part of the medieal record, isin writing and speaks for itself. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 84, _ [tis ADMITTED that the nurse providing nursing eare tothe Plaintiff documented that Plaintiff's obstetrician was atthe bedside discussing the obstetrician's plan of eare for the Plaintiff with the Plaintif. That documentation by the nurse is in the medical record, isin waiting and speaks for itself. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 85, It is ADMITTED upon information and belief that Plaintiff's obstetrician had a tmedical plan ofeare forthe Plait atthe times eelevant tothe allegations in this paragraph [tis ADMITTED that the nurses employed by the Answering Defendant were providing nursing care ‘consistent with the plan of cate of the Plaintiff's obstetrician. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 86, It is ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician performed an examination and evaluation of the Plaintiff at about 9:00 pam. It is ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetician prepared a progress note related to that evaluation and examination. It is ADMITTED that the progress note is part of the medical record, is in writing and speaks for itself, including how Plaintif's obstetrician documented her assessment of fetal wellbeing, Except as specifically ‘admited herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED, 87. It is ADMITTED upon information and belief that Plaitit’s obstetrician had plan of care for the Plaintiff at the times relevant 0 the allegations in this paragraph It is ADMITTED that the nurses employed by the Answering Defendant were providing nursing care consistent with that plan of eare, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis pragraph are DENIED. 88. Itis ADMITTED that Plaimiff's obstetrician instructed Plaintif to begin pushing tis ADMITTED that the Plaintiff's obstetrician prepared a progress note related to an evaluation and examination that occurred at about the same time Plaintif’s obstetrician instructed Plaintiff to start pushing. tis ADMITTED that the progress note i part of the medical record, isin writing and speaks for itself, including how Plaintiff's obstetrician documented her assessment of fetal wellbeing. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 89, tis ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician instructed PlaintfT to push during the time relevant to this allegation. Itis ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician was frequently at the ‘bedside while the Plaintiff was pushing and that Plaintiff's obstetrician did not make any changes te the plan of care during the time period that isthe subject ofthis allegation. Except as specifically ‘admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 90. Ibis ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician instructed Plaimtiff to push during the time relevant to this allegation. It is ADMITTED Plaintiff's obstetrician was frequently at the es somes Bbedside while the Plaintiff was pushing and that Plaintif's obstetrician did not make any changes to the plan of care during the time period that isthe subject of this allegation. I is ADMITTE that the nursing staff had, within their scope of practice as registered nurses, an appropriate understanding of etal heart tracings and the interpretation of the same, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 91. _ [tig ADMITTED that the nurse earing for Plaintif notified Plaintiff's obstetician at about 10:20 p.m. that Plaintiff was experiencing cervical bleeding. It is ADMITTED that Plainti's obstetrician responded by coming to the Plaintiffs bedside. I is ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician evaluated Plaintiff and did not make any change in the plan of eare for Plaintiff, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 92. _ Ibis ADMITTED that the nurse caring for Plaintiff notified Plains obstetrician at about 10:20 pum. that Plaintiff was experiencing cervical bleeding. It is ADMITTED that Plaintf's obstetrician responded by coming to the Plainti's bedside. It is ADMITTED that Plaintf's obstetrician evaluated Plaintiff and did not make any change in the plan of eare For Plaintif, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 93, _ tig ADMITTED that Plaintif’s nurse requested that Plaintiff's obstetrician come tothe Plaintif's bedside and evaluate PlaintfVat about 10:50 pm. Ibis ADMITTED that Plintif's ‘obstetrician responded and came to the bedside as the murse requested, It is ADMITTED that Plainif’s obstetrician prepared a progeess note at about this same time. That progress note is part, of the medieal record, isin writing and speaks fr itself, Except as specifically admisted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 94. The Answering Defendant does not know whether Zeb Smathers was present the entire time Ashley Smathers was in labor or what he saw when he was there, Therefore, the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint are DENIED under Rule 8(b. 98. DENIED. 96, DENIED, 97. DENIED. 98, DENIED. 99, DENIED 100. DENIED. tol. DENIED. 102, It is ADMITTED that the Answering Defendant owed Ashley Smathers and Stone ‘Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice, Except as specifically admitted herein te allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. ~ 14103. Ibis ADMITTED that the Answering Defendant owed Ashley Smathers and Stone ‘Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards ‘of practice. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 104, IL is DENIED that there was violation ofthe standards of practice and, therefore, the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 105. DENIED. 106, Its ADMITTED that prior to 19 March 2020 the Answering Defendant had putin place various written policies. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegatious in this ‘paragraph are DENIED. 107. DENIED. 108, DENIED. 109, It is ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers the duty 10 comply with the standands of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice Except as specifically admitted this allegation is DENTED. 110. [tis ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and Stone Smathers the duty to comply withthe standards of practice, and it dig comply with the standards of practice. Except as specifically admitted this allegation is DENIED. LIL. _ It is ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician prepared an operative report of the cesarean section, The operative report isin waiting and is contained in the medical record of the Plaintiff. The operative report is part of the medical record, is in writing and speaks for itself Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 112, Its ADMITTED that information about the initial newborn assessment of Stone ‘Smathers isin the medical record. The medical record isin waiting and speaks for itself. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 113. DENIED. 114, DENIED upon information and belie 11S. Itis ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician prepared an operative report regarding the eesarean section and that inthe operative repor the Plainif's obstewician described atony. It is ADMITTED that the operative report prepared by the Plainif’s obstetrician described Plaintf's bleeding and the measures the Plaintiff's obstetrician undertook duting the procedure to address the bleeding. The operative report prepared by the Plaintiff's obstetrician is part of the ‘medical record, is in writing and speaks for itself. Except as specifically admited herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. stone |116, IL is ADMITTED upon information and belief that Zeb Smathers was present for the cesarean section and was also present in the PACU. It is ADMITTED that the nursing talT notified an appropriate physician when Plaintif had bleeding inthe PACU. It is ADMITTED that physicians responded to this notification. The care and treatment of those physicians is documented in the medical record, is in writing and speaks for itsell. tis ADMITTED that the responding physicians made the decision to return Plaintif to the OR for treatment. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 117, [tis ADMITTED that Plaintiff's obstetrician prepared an operative report regarding the surgery’ that is the subject ofthis paragraph, Ic is ADMITTED that the operative repor is par of the medical record, isin writing and speaks for itsell.Itis ADMITTED that the quoted language inthis paragraph appears in the operative report prepared by the Plaintiffs obstetrician, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED, 118, It is ADMITTED, on information and belief, that Zeb Smathers called one of Ashley Smathers physicians during Ashley Smathers” surgery. and that physician returned to the hospital ta join the surgical team in the OR, Itis ADMITTED that the nursing staff provided care to Stone Smathers, It is ADMITTED upon information and belief that Zeb Smathers was ‘concerned about the health and wellbeing of Ashley Smathers, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 119, It ig ADMITTED there wore a number of physicians involved in the events described inthis paragraph of the Complain. [tis ADMITTED that ane ofthe physicians was the physician tha Plaintiff Zeb Smathers called. It is ADMITTED upon information and belief that there was a discussion between Plaintiff Zeb Smathers and the physician described in this paragraph. The Answering Defendant does not have knowledge or information about what was Said curing the conversation desribed inthis paragraph, For that reason this part of the allegation is DENIED pursuant to Rule 8(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 120. It is ADMITTED that one of the physicians involved in the surgery deseribed in this paragraph prepared an operative report of the procedure. Ibis ADMITTED that said operative report is part of the medical record, isin writing and speaks for itself. Fxcept as specifically admitted herein the allegations inthis paragraph are DENIED. 121, tis ADMITTED upon information and belie that there was a discussion between ‘Zeb Smathers and the physician described inthis paragraph. The Answering Defendant does not have knowledge or information about what was ssid during the conversation described in this paragraph. For that reason this par of the allegation is DENIED pursuant to Rule 8(b) of the Rules ‘of Civil Procedure. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 122. [tis ADMITTED that one of the physicians involved in the surgery described in ‘his paragraph propared an operative report of the procedure. [tis ADMITTED that said operative report is a written record and is contained in the medical record of the Plaintiff. That medical [ 6record is in writing and speaks for itself. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED, 123. DENIED. 124. _Itis ADMITTED thatthe hysterectomy performed by Plaintiff's physicians stopped Plaincif’s bleeding. It is ADMITTED that the medical record notes that Plaintiff lost about 10 liters blood. It is ADMITTED that Plaintiff was transferred to the ICU aftr the surgery and was Snitally intubated. its ADMITTED that Plaintiff survived and was able tobe discharged from the hospital a few days later. Except as speciically admiced herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 125, DENIED. 126, DENIED. 127, DENIED upon information and belief, 128, Ibis ADMITTED that about 13 hours after his birth, Stone Smathers exhibited signs of seizure-like activity. Except es specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED, 129, DENIED upon information and belief 130, It is ADMITTED that 2 code APGAR was called. It is ADMITTED that the APGAR team promptly responded at about 4:25 pum. [tis ADMITTED that there is an entry in ‘the medical record of Stone Smathers related to this event. Tis record is part ofthe medical record, is in writing and speaks for ise. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. BL. It is ADMITTED that on or about 8:37 pam. an MRI was performed on Stone ‘Smathers. Itis ADMITTED that the physician who interpreted the MRI prepared a writen reeord that is contained in the medical record of Stone Smathers. The medical record isin writing and speaks for itself, Except as ADMITTED herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 132, Itis DENIED that there was any placental pathology results related to this matter therefore, the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 133. DENIED. 134. It is ADMITTED that Stone Smathers was treated at the Hospital until he was sischarged on 31 March 2020, The physicians that eated Stone Smathers prepated medical reeord entries related to that care and treatment. Those entries are part of the medical record for Stone Smathers, ae in writing and speak for themselves. It is ADMITTED that Stone Smathers had follow-up appointments scheduled at the time of discharge, including an appointment on 8 April2020 with Reuters Children's Outpatient Center for Neurology. Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 135. ‘The answering Defendant denies the characterization of Stone Smathers” condition as contained in this paragraph of the Complaint and based on that these allegations are DENIED. 136 DENIED. 137, DENIED. 138, DENIED. 139, The preceding responses are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein, 140, It is ADMITTED that MH Mission Hospital, LLLP owed Ashley Smathers and ‘Stone Smathers the duty to comply with the standards of practice, and it did comply with the standards of practice, Except as specifically admitted herein the allegations in this paragraph are DENIED. 141. DENIED, including each and every subpar. 142, DENIED. 143, DENIED. 44, DENIED. 145, DENIED, 146, The preceding responses are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein 147. DENIED. 148, The preceding responses are incorporated by reference asi fully set forth herein 149, ‘The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact. For this reason they do not require a response, To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the contentions are DENIED, 150, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact. For this reason they do not require a response, To the extent & response is required from the Answering Defendant, the contentions are DENIED. ISI. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact, For this reason they do not require a response. To the extent 2 response is required from the Answering Defendant, the contentions are DENIED, 152. The preceding responses ate incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein,153. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact, For tis eason they do not require a response. To the extent a response is required fiom the Answering Defendant, the contentions are DENIED, 154. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, nt assertions of fact. For this reason they do not require a response, To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 155. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact. For this reason they do not require a response, To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, te allegations are DENIED. 156, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are Jegal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fat. For this reason they do not requite a yesponse. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the allegations are DENIED. 157. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact. For this reason they do not require a response. To the extent response is required from the Answering Defendant, te allegations are DENIED. 158. DENIED, including each and every subpart. 159, DENIED. 160, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irclevant to this lawauit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. 161. the contentions inthis paragraph of the Complaint are iretevant to this lawsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. 162. The contentions in ths paragraph of the Complaint are irelevant to this lawsuit, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph of the Complaint 163. The contentions inthis paragraph ofthe Complaint ae irelevant to this lawsuit, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves o strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint 164, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irrelevant to this lawsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to stike this paragraph of the Complaint. 165. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irrelevant to this lawsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph of the Compa 166. ‘The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irrelevant to this lawsuit, ‘MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. 167, ‘The contentions inthis paragraph of the Complaint are jrefevant to ths lawsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. S064 |168. ‘The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irelevant to this lawsuit, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. 169, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irelevant to this lawsult. MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. 170, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irrelevant to ths lawsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint 171. ‘The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irrelevant to this lawsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint, 172. ‘The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irelevant to this lawsuit, MH Mission Hospital, LLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph of the Complain. 173, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are relevant to this lawsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. 174, The contentions in ths paragraph of the Complaint ate inelevant to this lawsuit, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint 175. ‘The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irelevant to this lawsuit, [MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph of the Complain. 176, _‘The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irelevant to this lnwsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. 177, The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irrelevant fo this lawsuit MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint 178, ‘The contentions in ths paragraph of the Complaint are irelevant to this lsu. MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. 179. “The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are irelevant to this lawsuit, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to strike this paragraph of the Complaint 180. ‘The contentions inthis paragraph of the Complaint are icelevant to this lawsuit, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP therefore moves to steike this paragraph ofthe Complaint. I81. The preceding responses are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth erein 182. The contentions in this paragraph of the Complaint are legal arguments and conclusions, not assertions of fact. For this reason they do not require a response. To the extent a response is required from the Answering Defendant, the contentions are DENIED. ‘To the extent there are any allegations inthe Plaintiffs" Complaint that are not expressly addressed by the foregoing responses, then, those allegations are hereby DENIED. - 20WHEREFORE, the Answering Defendant, MH Mission Hospital, LLLP, respectfully prays the Court for the following relief 1, ‘That the Plaintiff’ Complaint be dismissed with prejudice 2. That the Plaintiffs have and recover nothing ftom this Answering Defendant, 3. That the costs of this action, including atomey’s fees as may be allowed by law, be taxed to the Plaintiff to the Paintifts counsel 4, That the Answering Defendant have a tial by jury. 5. Forsuch other and further reli as the Court deems just and proper This the 29% day of Novernber, 2022. ROBERTS & ST BY: Bar No. 21134 IAMES W. K. WILDE N.C. Bat No. 37485 DAVID C. HAWISHER N.C. Bar No, $3502 P.O. Box 7547 Asheville, NC 28802 (828) 252-6500 Counsel for Defendants swe 2ERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, This isto cently thatthe undersigned has this date served the foregoing Defendant MIT Mission Hospital, LLLP's Motion to Strike, Motions 10 Dismiss, Defenses and Answer to Plaintiffs’ Complaint upon all parties to this cause by depositing a copy hereof in a postpaid \wrapper in a post office or official depository under the exclusive eae and eustody of the United States Postal Service, properly addressed to the attorneys) of record as liste Matthew D. Ballew, Es, Robert Zaytoun, F's John R. Taylor, Esa Clare F. Kurdys, Eq, Zaytoun Ballew & Taylor, PLLC 3130 Faithill Drive, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612 Attorneys for Plaintiffs ‘This the 29* day of November, 2022. 2