Free Answer to Complaint - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

Jon R. Hultgren, Esq. , (#010014) Vincent M. Creta, Esq. , (#019044) HAMMERMAN & HULTGREN, P.
3101 North Central, Suite 1070 Phoenix, Arizona 85012

Telephone: (602) 264- 2566 Facsimile: (602) 266- 3488

Attorneys for Coldwell Banker Hildo , Inc. and Marsha L. Tomerlin
IN THE UNITED
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
DA VID MENKEN , a single man

NO. 04- 598- PHX- MHM

Plaintiff
vs.

GERRY F. EMM, husband; MAXINE C. EMM, wife; COLDWELL BANKER ITILDO INC. , a foreign corporation; MARSHA L. TOMERLIN , wife; JOHN DOE TOMERLIN; DAVID J. MORANDI, husband, JANE DOE MORANDI, wife; SCARPELLO , HUSS & OSHINSKI, LTD. , a Nevada Law Firm

ANSWER
(Assigned to the Honorable Mary H. Murguia)

Defendants.

Defendants, Coldwell Banker Hildo , Inc. and Marsha L. Tomerlin, by and through their
counsel undersigned, as and for their Answer to
allege, the following:

, hereby admit, deny, and

The Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Complaint.
II.

The Defendants admit only those allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the Complaint
that relate to the answering

knowledge.
III.

The Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the Complaint.

Case 2:04-cv-00598-MHM

Document 72

Filed 03/24/2008

Page 1 of 6

IV.

The Defendants admit that the firm
performed legal services for the answering Defendants and may do so again.

The Defendants admit that Morandi
relevant to the Complaint.
VI.

The Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
VII.

The Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
VIII.

Paragraph 8 of the Complaint does not call for an admission or denial.
IX.

The Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 9 of the Complaint.

The Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of the Complaint.
XI.

The Defendants admit that the Judgment was recorded on May 1 , 2003.
XII.

The Defendants admit that Arizona law permits the recording of federal judgments.
statute cited speaks for itself.
XIII.

The Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of the Complaint.
XlV.

The Defendants admit generally that a recorded judgment becomes a lien by operation of

law and that the Plaintiff has apparently owned the " property" during certain intervals.

Case 2:04-cv-00598-MHM

Document 72

Filed 03/24/2008

Page 2 of 6

xv.
In

responding to paragraph 16 of the Complaint, the Defendants admit that

speaks for itself.
XVI.
In

responding to paragraph 17 of the Complaint, the Defendants admit that Exhibit C

speaks for itself.
XVII.
In

responding to paragraphs 18 through 20 of the Complaint, the Defendants admit that

Exhibits D , E and F speak for themselves.
XVIII.

The Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 21 of the Complaint.
XIX.
In

responding to paragraph 22 of the Complaint, the Defendants admit that Exhibit G

speaks for itself.
XX.
In

responding to paragraph 23 of the Complaint, the Defendants admit that Exhibit H

speaks for itself but denies its authenticity and the remainder of the allegations.
XXI.

The Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 24 of the Complaint.
XXII.
In

responding to paragraph 25 of the Complaint, the Defendants admit that Exhibit J speaks

for itself.
XXIII.

The Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the Complaint.

Case 2:04-cv-00598-MHM

Document 72

Filed 03/24/2008

Page 3 of 6

COUNT ONE

(Negligence)
XXIV.

The Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 28 of the Complaint.

XXv.

The Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 29 of the Complaint.
XXVI.
The Defendants deny the

Complaint.
COUNT TWO

(Wrongful Interference With Contractual Relations)
XXVII.
The Defendants deny the

Complaint.

COUNT THREE
(Civil Extortion)
XXIII.
The Defendants deny the

Complaint.

COUNT FOUR
(A. R.S.
9 33- 420)

XXIV.
The Defendants deny the

Complaint.
XXv.

Defendants affirmatively allege that the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief

Case 2:04-cv-00598-MHM

Document 72

Filed 03/24/2008

Page 4 of 6

can be granted, failure to join necessary parties ,

lack of jurisdiction

, failure of consideration

assumption of risk, waiver, statute of frauds, unclean hands, contributory negligence, and any

other affirmative defenses available to but currently unknown to the Defendants.
WHEREFORE having fully replied to the
respectfully request:

, the

That the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice;

That Plaintiff take nothing thereby;

That the Defendants be awarded its costs and reasonable attorneys ' fees incurred
herein; and

That the Defendants be awarded such other and further relief that the Court may
deem just and proper.
DATED

this 24th day of March, 2008.

HAMMERMAN & HULTGREN, P.

/s/ Vincent M. Creta Vincent M. Creta Jon R. Hultgren 3101 N. Central Avenue, Suite 500 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 Attorneys for Coldwell Banker Hildo , Inc. and Marsha L. Tomerlin

Case 2:04-cv-00598-MHM

Document 72

Filed 03/24/2008

Page 5 of 6

COpy

of the foregoing

provided via e- file this 24th day of March, 2008 , to:

Honorable Mary H. Murguia United States District Court - District of Arizona Sandra Day O' Connor U. S. Courthouse, Ste. 525 401 W. Washington St. , SPC 53
5 Phoenix, AZ 85003
and COpy

mailed to:

Terrance J. Slominski SLOMINSKI & ASSOCIATES 7150 S. W. Hampton, Suite 201 Tigard, OR 97223 Attorney for Plaintiff

Vincent M. Creta

Case 2:04-cv-00598-MHM

Document 72

Filed 03/24/2008

Page 6 of 6