Case 2:15-cv MJP Document 3 Filed 08/24/15 Page 1 of 7

Similar documents
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY

Case 2:15-cv MJP Document 15 Filed 04/17/15 Page 1 of 9

Case 2:16-cv MAT Document 10 Filed 03/11/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. Plaintiff.

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY. Defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. (hereinafter FedEx Ground ), by and

Case 2:16-cv JCC Document 9 Filed 02/29/16 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Case 2:13-cv BJR Document 12 Filed 06/21/13 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. For its answer to the Complaint, Defendants James Allen Diamonds, Inc.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING. No SEA

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

Case 3:13-cv M Document 60 Filed 12/19/14 Page 1 of 20 PageID 1778

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE I. INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT YAKIMA

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR SNOHOMISH COUNTY

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv RAJ Document 8 Filed 03/30/16 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY

Case 2:15-cv RSL Document 88 Filed 06/22/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIMS

Case 2:17-cv RAJ Document 36 Filed 07/21/17 Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

2. Defendant is the record owner of certain property consisting of the north half of Lot K and Lot I in Block 58 as shown on the Subdivision Plat.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

I. ANSWER. COMES NOW Defendant IMPULSE MEDIA GROUP, INC. in the above-captioned

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/25/ :15 AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2017

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/19/ :45 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 168 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/19/2018

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 75 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 17

Case 1:17-cv TSC Document 13 Filed 09/08/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

AMENDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ANSWER

Case3:10-cv SI Document25 Filed02/25/10 Page1 of 8

Case 1:13-cv FDS Document 57 Filed 08/27/14 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

STATE OF WASHINGTON THURSTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

Case 2:12-cv TSZ Document 21 Filed 08/06/12 Page 1 of 5 The Honorable Mary Alice Theiler

NAILAH K. BYRD CUYAHOGA COUNTY CUERK OF COURTS 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio Court of Common Pleas

Case 1:16-cv LGS Document 21 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 1:10-CV ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY

DISTRICT COURT, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO. 201 La Porte Avenue, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO Phone: (970) Plaintiff:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CASE NO.: 1:15-CV LCB-LPA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Snell & Wilmer IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. Leslie Feldman, et al.,

Case 2:17-cv RSM Document 14 Filed 05/30/17 Page 1 of 9

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/18/ :03 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 59 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/18/2016

Case 2:06-cv RSM Document 30 Filed 05/04/2006 Page 1 of 6

8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR PIERCE COUNTY 9 STATE OF WASHINGTON, 10. Defendant. I. INTRODUCTION

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

* IN THE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * AFFIDAVIT OF N. TUCKER MENEELY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO

ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM BUSINESS DISPUTE

INTRODUCTION JURISDICTION VENUE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 3:16-cv REP Document 24 Filed 07/01/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID# 447

Case 1:08-cv RPM Document 12 Filed 01/16/09 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY. No. PLAINTIFF BENDARE DUNDAT, INC hereby complains and avers as follows: I.

Case 8:16-cv Document 1 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 19 Page ID #:1

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO. I. INTRODUCTION

SUGGESTED AMENDMENT SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL RULES (CR)

NAILAH K. BYRD CUYAHOGA COUNTY CUERK OF COURTS 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio Court of Common Pleas

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

FILED 16 AUG 29 PM 2:30

ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM OF DEFENDANTS PINE TREE HOMES, LLC AND SANTIAGO JOHN JONES

Case 4:15-cv DPM Document 25 Filed 05/06/16 Page 1 of 12

Case 2:13-cv JRG-RSP Document 12 Filed 07/10/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 104

DSV Air & Sea GmbH et al v. Bragg Investment Company Inc. et al View Document View Docket

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE July 10, 2014 Session

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:08-cv TPG Document Filed 02/25/11 Page 2 of 85

Case 3:07-cv SI Document 25 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 7

CIVIL ACTION. Defendant Jeff Carter, by and through his counsel Law Offices of Walter M. Luers, by

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF WAYNE ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY I. RELIEF REQUESTED

1 THE HONORABLE THOMAS S. ZILLY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

Motion Picture Association of America v. CrystalTech Web Hosting Inc. Doc. 769

Case: 1:17-cv DCN Doc #: 14 Filed: 03/02/17 1 of 19. PageID #: 69

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY. Peter S. Holmes, Kent C. Meyer, Jessica Nadelman, Attorneys of Record for Defendant

Case 6:13-cv AA Document 20 Filed 03/18/13 Page 1 of 7 Page ID#: 132

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 03/05/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case: 5:10-cv Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/12/10 1 of 8. PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION

FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY. AERO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., a Washington corporation, Honorable Susan Craighead

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 09/30/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 1:13-cv WYD-MEH Document 29 Filed 02/26/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Linda H. Youngs Hanson, Baker, Ludlow and Drumheller, P.S. Bellevue, WA and Gail Gorud Thomas, Gorud & Graves Kirkland, WA

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ) ) ) ) Plaintiff Mohamed A. Hussein ( Plaintiff ), by his attorneys and on behalf of all others

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

Case 2:13-cv MJP Document 19 Filed 01/29/14 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

Case 2:15-cv TSZ Document 15 Filed 12/18/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Sequoia Park Associates, a California limited partnership, Petitioner and Plaintiff,

Case 2:07-cv RAJ Document 87 Filed 03/27/2009 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

thejasminebrand.com thejasminebrand.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:10-cv RLH -PAL Document 29 Filed 12/02/10 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CASE NO. 3:16-CV-285

Case 2:16-cv DN Document 2 Filed 01/15/16 Page 1 of 30

Transcription:

Case :-cv-0-mjp Document Filed 0// Page of 0 TRACY NEIGHBORS AND BARBARA NEIGHBORS; ARUL MENEZES AND LUCRETIA VANDERWENDE; LAKE SAMMAMISH LLC; HERBERT MOORE AND ELYNNE MOORE; TED DAVIS AND ELAINE DAVIS; REID BROWN AND TERESA BROWN; SHAWN HUARTE AND TRINA HUARTE; ANNETTE MCNABB; EUGENE MOREL AND ELIZABETH MOREL; VOLKER ELSTE AND GAIL UREEL; JOHN R. WARD AND JOANNA WARD, AS CO-TRUSTEES OF THE WARD HALES LIVING TRUST; YORK HUTTON; L. LARS KNUDSEN AND LISE SHDO, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Plaintiffs, KING COUNTY, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Washington, Defendant. No. :-CV-0 ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM OF DEFENDANT KING COUNTY COMES NOW defendant King County, by and through its attorneys of record, both to answer plaintiffs complaint and to counterclaim as set forth below. In answer to plaintiffs ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM - () -00 Fax () -

Case :-cv-0-mjp Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Complaint, Defendant admits, denies and alleges as set forth below. Each and every allegation contained in plaintiffs Complaint not expressly admitted in full below is denied. The paragraph numbers in the Answer below correspond to the paragraph numbers in plaintiffs Complaint: THE PARTIES.-. Answering paragraphs - of the Complaint, King County is presently without sufficient information to answer the allegations of fact contained in those paragraphs and therefore denies them.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County admits that it is a home rule charter county and a political subdivision of the State of Washington of the State of Washington. JURISDICTION AND VENUE. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County denies that the state court has jurisdiction of the claims and defenses in this action.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County admits that RCW..00 is the mandatory venue statute applicable to plaintiffs action, that the portion of the East Lake Sammamish Rail Corridor ( ELSRC ) implicated by plaintiffs action is located in King County and that defendant King County is located within the geographic boundaries of King County. To the extent that this paragraph includes any additional allegations of fact, King County denies the same. FACTS. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County admits that various railroad companies operated trains over the ELSRC, which is adjacent to the east shore of Lake Sammamish in the cities of Issaquah, Sammamish and Redmond. Except as so admitted, King County denies each and every other allegation of fact in this paragraph and specifically denies plaintiffs allegation that the ELSRC is narrow.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County admits that it currently possesses all property interests in the ELSRC that were formerly held by BNSF and Land ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM - () -00 Fax () -

Case :-cv-0-mjp Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Conservancy of Seattle pursuant to the specified deeds, but denies that the ELSRC is properly characterized as a right of way over its entire length.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County admits that it possesses property rights under the specified deeds that cover the entirety of the ELSRC and grant King County exclusive control over the ELSRC, including the right to allow public use of the ELSRC. King County further admits that it has constructed an interim trail over the ELSRC and a permanent trail over portions of the ELSRC. It further admits that it has applied for permits for further development of the interim trail over a portion of the ELSRC, but denies the remaining factual allegations in this paragraph.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County denies the same. CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County denies the same.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County denies the same.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County denies the same.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County admits that some or all of plaintiffs have constructed walkways, driveways, parking areas, landscaping systems, utilities and have planted landscaping within the ELSRC. Except as so admitted, King County denies each and every additional allegation contained in paragraph.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County denies the same.. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County denies the same. CLAIM FOR QUIET TITLE. Answering paragraph of the Complaint, King County denies the same. KING COUNTY S COUNTERCLAIM FOR QUIET TITLE, EJECTMENT AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENT Counterclaim. In the event that this case is not dismissed in its entirety under federal preemption, King County asserts the following Counterclaim. ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM - () -00 Fax () -

Case :-cv-0-mjp Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Counterclaim. As Counterclaim Plaintiff, King County re-alleges its answers to - of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein. Counterclaim. King County owns fee title or exclusive railroad easement rights characterized as a quasi-fee in the portions of the ELSRC that are adjacent to plaintiff s property. Counterclaim. Plaintiffs have interfered with King County s property rights in the ELSRC by erecting and maintaining various unauthorized improvements that impede King County s access to its property and prevent public enjoyment. Counterclaim. Under RCW., title to the disputed portion of property should be quieted in King County. Counterclaim. Plaintiffs should be required to remove any unauthorized improvements erected and maintained within the ELSRC. Counterclaim. Plaintiffs should be required to pay current and back rent and/or special use fees for all unauthorized uses of the ELSRC. FURTHER ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES BY WAY OF FURTHER ANSWER and AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES to plaintiffs Complaint, and without admitting anything previously denied, King County asserts the following affirmative defenses against each plaintiff.. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, have failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.. Plaintiffs have failed to join indispensable parties.. Plaintiffs have failed to establish personal jurisdiction by properly serving King County.. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, have stated claims under Washington law that are preempted by federal law.. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, have stated claims that are barred by the statute of ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM - () -00 Fax () -

Case :-cv-0-mjp Document Filed 0// Page of 0 limitations.. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, have stated claims that are barred by the doctrine of laches.. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, have stated claims that are barred by the doctrine of waiver.. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, have stated claims that fail because plaintiffs acquiesced in the acts about which plaintiffs now complain.. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, have stated claims that are barred by the doctrine of estoppel. 0. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, have stated claims that they, or their predecessors in title, have previously released.. Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, are not the real parties in interest. King County reserves the right to amend this Answer and assert additional affirmative defenses. WHEREFORE, having answered Plaintiff s Complaint, King County requests that this Court DISMISS Plaintiff s Complaint with prejudice, GRANT King County s Counterclaims, and award Defendant King County its costs and reasonable attorney s fees, and award such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and equitable. Dated this th day of August,. DANIEL T. SATTERBERG King County Prosecuting Attorney By: s/ David J. Hackett DAVID HACKETT, WSBA # By: s/ H. Kevin Wright H. KEVIN WRIGHT, WSBA # ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM - () -00 Fax () -

Case :-cv-0-mjp Document Filed 0// Page of 0 By: s/ Peter G. Ramels PETER G. RAMELS, WSBA # By: s/ Andrew W. Marcuse ANDREW W. MARCUSE, WSBA # Attorneys for Defendant King County King County Prosecuting Attorney s Office 00 Fourth Ave., th Floor Seattle, WA. 0 Telephone: () - / Fax: () - Email: david.hackett@kingcounty.gov kevin.wright@kingcounty.gov pete.ramels@kingcounty.gov andrew.marcuse@kingcounty.gov ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM - () -00 Fax () -

Case :-cv-0-mjp Document Filed 0// Page of 0 DECLARATION OF FILING AND SERVICE I hereby certify that on August,, I electronically filed the foregoing Notice to Plaintiffs of Removal with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following: John T. Ludlow Hanson Baker Ludlow Drumheller P.S. th Avenue NE, Suite 0 Bellevue, WA 00 () - jludlow@hansonbaker.com I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States and the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED this th day of August, at Seattle, Washington. s/ Kris Bridgman Kris Bridgman, Legal Secretary King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM - () -00 Fax () -