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

Case 1:04-cv-01392-JJF

Document 22

Filed 12/21/2006

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE WALLACE E. HARDEN, Plaintiff, v. GOVERNOR RUTH ANN MINNER, ET AL., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

C.A. No. 04-1392-JJF

DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO THE COMPLAINT COME NOW, the Defendants, Michael Knight and Christopher M. Klein, by and through their undersigned counsel, and hereby answer the Complaint of Plaintiff Wallace E. Harden ("Harden" or "Plaintiff"), filed November 3, 2005 (D.I. 12) (the "Complaint"). The Complaint is numbered but some of the paragraphs contain multiple averments. Therefore Defendants respond to the Complaint by paragraph as follows: 1. Admitted 2. The sentence that begins "Following an unknown" is denied. As to the remaining sentences in Paragraph No. 2, Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 3. The Complaint does not contain a Paragraph No. 3, but skips to No. 4. 4. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 5. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 6. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the

Case 1:04-cv-01392-JJF

Document 22

Filed 12/21/2006

Page 2 of 5

allegations as set forth. 7. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 8. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 9. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 10. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 11. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 12. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 13. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. 14. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to affirm or deny the allegations as set forth. Cause of Action This portion of the Complaint runs from pages 4 to 6. Certain sections are unnumbered paragraphs and others are numbered paragraphs. The allegations under Cause of Action state legal arguments/conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent that an answer is required, the allegations are specifically denied in their entirety.

Case 1:04-cv-01392-JJF

Document 22

Filed 12/21/2006

Page 3 of 5

RELIEF It is specifically denied that Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory, punitive or any monetary damages. It is specifically denied that Plaintiff is entitled to declaratory, injunctive or any other relief. DEFENSES AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. 2. 3. Amendment. 5. 6. Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. As to any claims under state law, Defendants are entitled to immunity Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Defendants are immune from liability under the Eleventh

under the State Tort Claims Act, 10 Del. C. § 4001 et seq. 7. As to any claims under state law, Defendants are entitled to sovereign

immunity in his official capacity. 8. Defendants cannot be held liable in the absence of personal involvement

for the alleged constitutional deprivations. 9. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks to hold Defendants liable based on

supervisory responsibilities, the doctrine of respondeat superior or vicarious liability is not a basis for liability in an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 10. Defendants, in their official capacity, are not liable for alleged violations

of Plaintiff's constitutional rights as they are not "persons" within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 11. Insufficiency of service of process.

Case 1:04-cv-01392-JJF

Document 22

Filed 12/21/2006

Page 4 of 5

12. 13.

Insufficiency of process. Lack of jurisdiction over the person and subject matter.

WHEREFORE, the State Defendants respectfully requests that judgment be entered in their favor and against Plaintiff as to all claims and that attorney fees be awarded to the Defendants. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE STATE OF DELAWARE /s/ Stacey Xarhoulakos_____ Stacey Xarhoulakos, # 4667 Deputy Attorney General Department of Justice 820 N. French Street, 6th Floor Wilmington, De 19801 (302) 577-8400 Dated: December 21, 2006 Attorney for Defendants Michael Knight and Christopher Klein

Case 1:04-cv-01392-JJF

Document 22

Filed 12/21/2006

Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 21, 2006, I electronically filed Defendants' Answer to the Complaint with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I hereby certify that on December 21, 2006, I have mailed by United States Postal Service, the document to the following non-registered participant: Wallace E. Harden SBI # 146818 Delaware Correctional Center 1181 Paddock Road Smyrna, DE 19977 /s/ Stacey Xarhoulakos Deputy Attorney General Department of Justice 820 N. French St., 6th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801 (302) 577-8400 [email protected]