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

Similar documents
AMENDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM

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

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

ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM BUSINESS DISPUTE

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABAMA

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

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/07/ :32 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 164 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/07/2018

thejasminebrand.com thejasminebrand.com

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

Case3:13-cv SI Document11 Filed03/26/13 Page1 of 17

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

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil Case No.: 18-cv (WMW/SER)

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/31/ :29 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 37 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/31/2016

IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION WAKE COUNTY 14 CVS 13934

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO UNOPPOSED MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL

Case 1:10-cv UNA Document 6 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:07-cv MRB Document 6 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Case: 4:13-cv ERW Doc. #: 28 Filed: 04/30/13 Page: 1 of 8 PageID #: 144

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

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

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/22/ :49 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 23 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/22/2016. Exhibit D {N

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

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

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

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Plaintiff Said Hakim (Plaintiff) by his attorneys, Law Offices of Ian L. Blant, and

DEFENDANT CITY OF FORT COLLINS ANSWER WITH CROSS-CLAIM

Case 3:16-cv DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 1 of 11

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/03/2013 INDEX NO /2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 108 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/03/2013

FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 03/30/ :14 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 62 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/30/2018

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT YAKIMA

R. BRIAN DIXON, Bar No LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

Case 3:15-cv RGJ-KLH Document 38 Filed 11/25/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 257 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

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 THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/02/ :13 AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/02/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/19/ :05 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/19/2015

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case Doc 19 Filed 06/01/16 Entered 06/01/16 14:19:45 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/07/ :53 PM INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 64 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/07/2015

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/ :47 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 61 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2015

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/ :49 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/26/2015

FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 01/23/ :02 PM

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/04/ :53 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/04/2016

Attorneys for Defendant SAK CONSTRUCTION, LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

INTRODUCTION JURISDICTION VENUE

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/06/ :18 PM INDEX NO /2006 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/06/2016. Exhibit 21

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Charlotte Division. Chapter 11

ANSWER PACKET NON-SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS ON PREPARING AN ANSWER

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/30/ :41 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2016

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case 1:11-cv NLH-KMW Document 19 Filed 06/01/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 196 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

SUNBELT RENTALS, INC S FORTHWITH MOTION TO INTERVENE. Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. ( Sunbelt ), by its attorneys at Darling Milligan Horowitz PC,

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

Filing # E-Filed 12/22/ :53:20 PM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 1:12-cv DJC Document 36 Filed 09/10/13 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TH EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-1294 v.

case 4:12-cv RLM-APR document 10 filed 02/27/12 page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA LAFAYETTE DIVISION

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT, OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA -CIVIL DIVISION-

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

MOTION FOR TELEPHONE TESTIMONY OF W. SCOTT ROCKEFELLER WITH REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED RULING

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/28/2011 INDEX NO /2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/28/2011

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/19/ :59 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 11 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2016 EXHIBIT 2

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

JUSTICE COURT CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA

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

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/08/ :44 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 85 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/08/2018

Case 1:06-cv MSK-BNB Document 33 Filed 09/08/06 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

2:08-cv CWH-BM Date Filed 08/29/2008 Entry Number 5 Page 1 of 8

Defendant: PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY COURT USE ONLY Counsel for Plaintiff: Marc R. Levy, #11372

Case 3:16-cv BAS-DHB Document 3 Filed 05/02/16 Page 1 of 9

Case 4:17-cv PJH Document 61 Filed 02/28/18 Page 1 of 33

Plaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC ( Plaintiff ) complains and alleges as follows against Defendant Gimme Gimme, LLC ( Defendant ).

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 02/24/ /31/ :26 08:31 PM AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 637 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/24/2017

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/31/ :16 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 78 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/31/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/17/ :50 PM INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 72 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/17/2014

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

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/03/ :58 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 9 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/03/2016

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/20/18 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY S FEES AND COSTS FROM CITY OF FORT COLLINS

HUSHHUSH ENTERTAINMENT, INC.

Shura Council Internal Regulations. Majlis Ash-Shura (Shura Council) Rules of Procedure

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. -v- Civil No. 3:12-cv-4176

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/05/ :54 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 148 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2018

Case 3:17-cv DPJ-FKB Document 5 Filed 05/19/17 Page 1 of 15

MOTION TO STRIKE, IN PART; FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT AND TO DISMISS, IN PART, FOR LACK OF RIPENESS

Transcription:

City and County of Denver, Denver, Colorado District Court Court Address: 1437 Bannock Street, Denver, CO 80202 Plaintiffs: WHITNEY SMITH AND CARLOS SMITH, individuals v. Defendants: PINE TREE CUSTOM HOMES, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, and SANTIAGO JOHN JONES, an individual. COURT USE ONLY Andrew Contiguglia, #26901 Lia Fazzone, #27832 Attorneys for Defendant Contiguglia/Fazzone, P.C. 400 South Colorado Boulevard, Suite 830 Denver, CO 80206 (303) 780-7333 E-Mail: ajc@ajcpc.com Case No. 2009 CV Division: Courtroom ANSWER AND COUNTERCLAIM OF DEFENDANTS PINE TREE HOMES, LLC AND SANTIAGO JOHN JONES COMES NOW, Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones, by and through Andrew J. Contiguglia of Contiguglia/Fazzone, P.C., and hereby answers Plaintiffs Complaint as follows: PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number one of Plaintiffs 2. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number two of Plaintiffs 3. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number three of 4. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number four of 5. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number five of Plaintiffs

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS The Cost Plus Fee Contract 6. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number six of Plaintiffs Complaint to the extent that the Parties entered into a contract, Plaintiffs Exhibit 1, the terms of which speak for themselves. Defendants deny the remainder of paragraph six. 7. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number seven of Plaintiffs Complaint to the extent that such statement is consistent with the actual terms of the contract which speak for themselves. Defendants deny the remainder of paragraph seven. 8. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number eight of Plaintiffs Complaint to the extent that such statement is consistent with the actual terms of the contract which speak for themselves. Defendants deny the remainder of paragraph eight. 9. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number nine of Plaintiffs Complaint to the extent that such statement is consistent with the actual terms of the contract which speak for themselves. Defendants deny the remainder of paragraph nine. 10. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number ten of Plaintiffs Complaint to the extent that such statement is consistent with the actual terms of the contract which speak for themselves. Defendants deny the remainder of paragraph ten. 11. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph eleven of Plaintiffs 12. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number twelve of Plaintiffs Complaint to the extent that the Parties entered into a contract, the terms of which speak for themselves. Defendants deny the remainder of paragraph twelve. Performance of the Contract 13. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number thirteen of 14. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number fourteen of 15. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number fifteen of 16. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number sixteen of

17. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number seventeen of 18. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number eighteen of 19. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number nineteen of FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF [Breach of Contract-Pine Tree] 20. Defendants hereby incorporate their answers contained in paragraphs number one through nineteen above as fully set forth herein. 21. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph number twenty-one of 22. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number twenty-two of 23. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number twenty-three of 24. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number twenty-four of 25. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number twenty-five of 26. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number twenty-six of 27. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number twenty-seven of SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF [Fraudulent Misrepresentation-Jones and Pine Tree] 28. Defendants hereby incorporate their answers contained in paragraphs number one through twenty-seven above as fully set forth herein. 29. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number twenty-nine of

30. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number thirty of 31. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number thirty-one of 32. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number thirty-two of 33. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number thirty-three of 34. Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph number thirty-four of DEFENSES 1. Plaintiffs fail to state a claim for which relief can be granted against Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones. 2. Plaintiffs are barred from recovery by the doctrine of waiver. 3. Plaintiffs are barred from recovery by the doctrine of estoppel. 4. Plaintiffs are barred from recovery by the doctrine of unclean hands. 5. Plaintiffs are barred from recovery by their own failure to mitigate their damages. 6. Plaintiffs are barred from recovery by the doctrine of accord and satisfaction. 7. Plaintiffs claims are barred because the amount of damages claimed to be due by the Complaint in this action are not due and owing. 8. The damages complained of by Plaintiffs are the result of acts, omissions or wrongful conduct of the Plaintiffs, and not that of Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones. 9. Plaintiffs claims are barred by the doctrine of laches. 10. Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones deny the truth of any allegations not previously admitted or denied. 11. Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones incorporate any defenses that might be available to them pursuant to Articles 101 to 117 of title 7 also known as the "Colorado Business Corporation Act."

12. Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones incorporate any defenses that might be available to them pursuant to C.R.S. 13-20-801 et. seq., also known as the "Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform Act." 13. Plaintiffs claims are frivolous and groundless pursuant to C.R.S. 13-11-101. 14. Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones reserve the right to assert additional defenses as additional facts become known during the course of discovery, and/or where asserting such additional defenses becomes necessary and appropriate. DEFENDANTS COUNTERCLAIMS GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. On March 4, 2007, the Parties entered into a contract as more specifically contained in plaintiffs Exhibit 1 to complaint. 2. Inter alia, Section 6.1 of the contract states, The owner will pay the contractor Pine Tree Custom Homes LLC the contract Sum, which is based on the actual Cost of the Work, as defined in section 9.0 plus 10% for the Contractor s profit plus $30,000.00 for Management Fees. Payment as follows 5% of the 10% fee at Frame stage (when house is framed) balance of 5% when certificate of occupancy is obtained. Management fee $15,000 at contract signing, balance of $15,000 at frame stage. 3. To date, the Defendants have not been paid in accordance with the terms set forth in the contract. FIRST COUNTER CLAIM FOR RELIEF [Breach of Contract-Whitney and Carlos Smith] 1. All preceding allegations contained in paragraphs one through three of Defendants General Allegations are hereby incorporated in the First Counter Claim for Relief. 2. The Defendants entered into a contract with the Plaintiffs; 3. The Plaintiffs failed to pay him compliance with the contract; 4. Defendants substantially performed their part of the contract; 5. As a result of the Plaintiffs actions, Defendants have incurred damages in an amount to be determined at trial. WHEREFORE, Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones pray for judgment in their favor and against the Plaintiffs in this action, compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial, for attorney fees and costs, prejudgment interest and for such and further relief as this Court deems just and proper in the matter.

Dated: October 6, 2009. Respectfully submitted, CONTIGUGLIA/FAZZONE, P.C. //s// Andrew J. Contiguglia Andrew Contiguglia, #26901 Attorney for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I hereby certify that on February 15, 2009 a true and correct copy of the foregoing Answer and Counterclaim of Defendants Pine Tree Custom Homes, LLC and Santiago John Jones was sent via Lexis / Nexis file and serve or by first class mail to the following individuals: Ima Whiner, Esq. Law Firm, L.L.C. 666 6 th Street, Suite 3000 Denver, CO 80202 //s// Andrew J. Contiguglia