Free Answer to Amended Complaint - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:03-cv-01095-JLK-GJR

Document 154

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 03-cv-01095-JLK-GJR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. 60.52 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, LOCATED IN LA PLATA COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO; AND SHIRLEY ISGAR, et al. Defendants.

ANSWER OF THE ISGAR DEFENDANTS TO THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT IN CONDEMNATION

Defendants Charles Isgar, Shirley Isgar, Anne Isgar and Arthur Isgar (the "Isgar Defendants") through their counsel, Lowe, Fell & Skogg, LLC, hereby answer the Second Amended Complaint in Condemnation (the "Second Amended Complaint") as follows: 1. The Isgar Defendants admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of the

Second Amended Complaint. 2. The Isgar Defendants admit that this action is brought pursuant to Rule

71A(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 3. Paragraph 3 states a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To

the extent that a response is required, the Isgar Defendants state that they are without sufficient information or knowledge to either admit or deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 and, therefore, deny the same.

{#00760705.1 09003-0001 4/16/2007 12:09 PM}

Case 1:03-cv-01095-JLK-GJR

Document 154

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 2 of 5

4. action. 5. 6.

The Isgar Defendants admit that this Court has jurisdiction over this civil

The Isgar Defendants admit that venue is proper in this Court. The Isgar Defendants admit that "Schedule A" is attached to the Second

Amended Complaint. The Isgar Defendants affirmatively state that Schedule A speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its own terms. The Isgar Defendants deny any allegations that are inconsistent with Schedule A. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or

knowledge to either admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 6 and, therefore, deny the same. 7. The Isgar Defendants admit that "Schedule A" is attached to the Second

Amended Complaint. The Isgar Defendants affirmatively state that Schedule A speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its own terms. The Isgar Defendants deny any allegations that are inconsistent with Schedule A. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or

knowledge to either admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 7 and, therefore, deny the same. 8. The Isgar Defendants admit that "Schedule B" is attached to the Second

Amended Complaint. The Isgar Defendants affirmatively state that Schedule B speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its own terms. The Isgar Defendants deny any allegations that are inconsistent with Schedule B. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or

knowledge to either admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 8 and, therefore, deny the same.

{#00760705.1 09003-0001 4/16/2007 12:09 PM}

2

Case 1:03-cv-01095-JLK-GJR

Document 154

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 3 of 5

9.

The Isgar Defendants admit that "Schedule B" and "Schedule C" are

attached to the Second Amended Complaint. The Isgar Defendants affirmatively state that Schedules B and C speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their own terms. The Isgar Defendants deny any allegations that are inconsistent with Schedules B and C. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or knowledge to either admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 9 and, therefore, deny the same. 10. The Isgar Defendants admit that they claim an interest in the property

identified in the Second Amended Complaint. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or knowledge to either admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 10 and, therefore, deny the same. 11. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or knowledge to

either admit or deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 11 and, therefore, deny the same. 12. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or knowledge to

either admit or deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 12 and, therefore, deny the same. 13. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or knowledge to

either admit or deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 and, therefore, deny the same. 14. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or knowledge to

either admit or deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 and, therefore, deny the same. 15. The Isgar Defendants are without sufficient information or knowledge to

either admit or deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 15 and, therefore, deny the same.

{#00760705.1 09003-0001 4/16/2007 12:09 PM}

3

Case 1:03-cv-01095-JLK-GJR

Document 154

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 4 of 5

GENERAL DENIAL All allegations not explicitly admitted herein by the Isgar Defendants are denied. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. 2. The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff has failed to comply with the provisions of 40 U.S.C. § 3114.

WHEREFORE, the Isgar Defendants respectfully request that this Court, in the alternative: A. Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint in Condemnation with respect to

the Isgar Defendants; and/or B. and/or C. Require Plaintiff to pay just compensation to the Isgar Defendants Grant appropriate relief on the affirmative defenses described above;

pursuant to Amendment 5 of the United States Constitution and all other applicable laws relating to the taking of private property, including, without limitation, laws governing the payment of interest, court costs, witness fees, expert witness fees, consultant fees, appraisal costs and any other costs which are otherwise appropriate for Plaintiff to pay the Isgar Defendants in the condemnation proceeding pending before this Court; and/or D. and proper. Order such other, further and different relief as the Court may deem just

{#00760705.1 09003-0001 4/16/2007 12:09 PM}

4

Case 1:03-cv-01095-JLK-GJR

Document 154

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 5 of 5

Dated: April 16, 2007. LOWE, FELL & SKOGG, LLC

s/ Jannine R. Mohr Kenneth K. Skogg Jannine R. Mohr 370 Seventeenth Street, Suite 4900 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone: 720-359-8200 Fax: 720-359-8201 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR THE ISGAR DEFENDANTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on April 16, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing ANSWER OF THE ISGAR DEFENDANTS TO THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT IN CONDEMNATION with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the following e-mail addresses: Stephen Taylor Michael A. Goldman M. Patrick Wilson Malcolm Murray [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

s/Anne Van Teyens

{#00760705.1 09003-0001 4/16/2007 12:09 PM}

5