Preview
MOON
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Feb-06-2012 10:38 am
Case Number: CGC-11-514980
Filing Date: Feb-06-2012 10:37
Juke Box: 001 Image: 03482260
ANSWER
JASON EVERETT THOMPSON et al VS. DEAN GREGORY ASIMOS
001C03482260
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Y } b “ KE
C. Todd Norris, SBN 181337 Son benrsison ny tet, 3 }
BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY PC eesti ong
601 California Street, Suite 1800 frp cee
Be ees?
San Francisco, California 94108
Telephone: 415.352.2700 ,
Facsimile: 415.352.2701 0 CERLOE THE OUR
E-Mail: todd.norris@bullivant.com .
Deputy Clerk
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants
JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED REAL
ESTATE GROUP, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED | Case No.: CGC-11-514980
REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC.,
ANSWER TO ASIMOS' CROSS-
Plaintiffs, COMPLAINT
ve
DEAN GREGORY ASIMOS, dba DRAKE
REALTY,
Defendant.
DEAN GREGORY ASIMOS, dba DRAKE
REALTY
Cross-Complainant
v.
JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED
REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC.,
Cross-Defendants
COMES NOW CROSS-DEFENDANTS JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED
REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC., to answer the unverified allegations in the Cross-Complaint of
Dean Gregory Asimos on file herein as follows:
GENERAL DENIAL
Cross-defendants deny generally and specifically, all and singular, each and every
13642838.1 =1-
ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINTallegation of the cross-complaint, and further denies that cross-defendants breached any contract
or duty, or were negligent and/or careless or otherwise at fault in and about the matters alleged
in said cross-complaint. Cross-defendants further deny that cross-complainant has been injured
and/or damaged in any sum, sums, or at all.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-defendants allege that the cross-complaint, and each cause of action contained
therein, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-complainant and/or his agents were negligent and/or careless in and about the
matters alleged in the cross-complaint, and to the extent said negligence and/or carelessness
caused and/or contributed to injuries and/or damages, if any, cross-complainant’s recovery
should be barred or proportionately reduced.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-Complainant breached his agreement with cross-defendant Thompson, and is
therefore barred from seeking the relief prayed for in his cross-complaint.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-complainant unreasonably failed to mitigate his damages, if any, and his recovery
must be barred or reduced accordingly.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The cross-complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred by the applicable statute
of limitations, including, but not necessarily limited to, those provided for under the California
Code of Civil Procedure §339, et seq., and by any applicable contractual suit time provisions.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-defendants’ conduct was not the cause in fact or the proximate cause of any of the
losses alleged in the cross-complaint.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-defendants have not violated any duty, contractual or otherwise, to the cross-
13642838.1 -2-
ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINTcomplainant, or to any party, and is not liable or indebted to the cross-complainant, or to any
party, for any reason or in any amount.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-complainants’ losses, if any, which are denied, were caused by the negligence,
acts, omissions or other fault of persons or entities other than this answering cross-defendant.
By reason of the relationship between those persons or entities and cross-complainant, the
negligence or other fault of those persons or entities is imputed to cross-complainant and any
tecovery by cross-complainant must be reduced in proportion to such negligence or other fault.
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The cross-complaint and each and every cause of action stated therein, is barred by the
fact that any such causes of action have been effectively released, discharged, contractually
barred, or barred by applicable law.
TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The cross-complaint is barred by the doctrine of estoppel.
ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The cross-complaint, and each cause of action contained therein, is barred by the
doctrine of laches.
TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-complainant has waived any right to assert any claims for damages or to seek any
other relief against cross-defendant by reason of its acts and omissions.
THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The cross-complaint is barred by the equitable doctrine of unclean hands.
FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Cross-complainant brought his cross-complaint against cross-defendant without
reasonable cause and without a good faith belief that ihere was a justifiable controversy under
the facts and the law, which warranted the filing of the cross-complaint against this responding
cross-defendants. Cross-complainant is in possession of no facts or evidence that would support
a good faith claim against cross-defendants. Indeed, cross-defendant Wired Real Estate Group,
13642838.1 -3-
ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINTInc. never even had a contract with cross-complainant Asimos. Cross-complainant is therefore
responsible for all of cross-defendant's necessary and reasonable defense costs and attorneys
fees as a result of cross-complainant’s bad faith in asserting claims he either knew or should
have known had no merit.
FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
If cross-defendants failed to perform any duty owed to cross-complainant, the
performance of such duty was prevented by the doctrines of impossibility and frustration.
SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The cross-complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred by the provisions of
California Civil Code Section 1473.
SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The cross-complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred by the principles of
accord and satisfaction.
EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Cross-Complaint and each of its causes of action therein, is barred by the doctrine of
consent.
WHEREFORE, Cross-Defendants pray that Cross-Complainant take nothing by his
Cross-Complaint herein; that Cross-Defendants be awarded their costs of suit; attorney’s fees,
and for such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.
DATED: January 17, 2012
BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY 2C
)
—™
'y
C. Todd
Attorneys for Pidintiffs and Cross-Defendants
JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED
REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC.
Felco
13642838.1 -4-
ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINTPROOF OF SERVICE
Thompson, and Wired Real Estate Group, Inc. v. Asimos, dba Drake Realty
San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC-11-514980
Iam employed in the City and County of San Francisco by the law firm of Bullivant
Houser Bailey, PC ("the business"), 601 California Street, Suite 1800, San Francisco, CA
94108. 1 am over the age of 18 and not a party to this action. On January 17, 2012, I served the
document(s) entitled:
ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINT
upon the following party(ies):
Jessica R. Barsotti
Eugene Zinovyev
Attorneys at Law
5032 Woodminster Ln.
Oakland, CA 94602
Tel: 510-530-4078
Fax: 510-530-4725
Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Complainant
DEAN GREGORY ASIMOS, dba DRAKE
REALTY
x] BY MAIL (CCP § 1013(a)): I am readily familiar with the ordinary practice of the
business with respect to the collection and processing of correspondence for mailing
with the United States Postal Service. I placed a true and correct copy(ies) of the above-
titled document(s) in an envelope(s) addressed as above, with first class postage thereon
fully prepaid. I sealed the aforesaid envelope(s) and placed it(them) for collection and
mailing by the United States Postal Service in accordance with the ordinary practice of
the business. Correspondence so placed is ordinarily deposited by the business with the
United States Postal Service on the same day.
O BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION (CCP § 1013(e), CRC 2.306): I transmitted the
document(s) by facsimile transmission by placing it(them) in a facsimile machine
(telephone number 415-352-2701) and transmitting it(them) to the facsimile machine
telephone number(s) listed above. A transmission report was properly issued by the
transmitting facsimile machine. Each transmission was reported as complete and
without error. A true and correct copy of the transmission report is attached hereto.
[J] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY (CCP § 1013(¢)): Iam readily familiar with the
ordinary practice of the business with respect to the collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing by Express Mail and other carriers providing for overnight
delivery. I placed a true and correct copy(ies) of the above-titled document(s) in an
envelope(s) addressed as above, with first class postage thercon fully prepaid. I sealed
the aforesaid envelope(s) and placed it(them) for collection and mailing by Express Mail
or other carrier for overnight delivery in accordance with the ordinary practice of the
business. Correspondence so placed is ordinarily deposited by the business with Express
Mail or other carrier on the same day.
13664863.1 -1l-
PROOF OF SERVICE(1 BY PERSONAL SERVICE UPON AN ATTORNEY (CCP § 1011(a)): I placed a true
and correct copy(ies) of the above-titled document(s) in a sealed envelope(s) addressed
as indicated above. I delivered each of said envelope(s) by hand to a receptionist or a
person authorized to accept same at the address on the envelope, or, if no person was
present, by leaving the envelope in a conspicuous place in the office between the hours
of nine in the morning and five in the afternoon.
BY PERSONAL SERVICE UPON A PARTY (CCP § 1011(b)): I placed a true and
correct copy(ies) of the above-titled document(s) in a sealed envelope(s) addressed as
indicated above. I delivered each of said envelope(s) by hand to a person of not less
than 18 years of age at the address listed on the envelope, between the hours of eight in
the morning and six in the evening.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on
January 17, 2012, at San Francisco, California.
vee 2) +
Fook
13664863.1 -2-
PROOF OF SERVICE
Preview
MOON SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Feb-06-2012 10:38 am Case Number: CGC-11-514980 Filing Date: Feb-06-2012 10:37 Juke Box: 001 Image: 03482260 ANSWER JASON EVERETT THOMPSON et al VS. DEAN GREGORY ASIMOS 001C03482260 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Y } b “ KE C. Todd Norris, SBN 181337 Son benrsison ny tet, 3 } BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY PC eesti ong 601 California Street, Suite 1800 frp cee Be ees? San Francisco, California 94108 Telephone: 415.352.2700 , Facsimile: 415.352.2701 0 CERLOE THE OUR E-Mail: todd.norris@bullivant.com . Deputy Clerk Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED | Case No.: CGC-11-514980 REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC., ANSWER TO ASIMOS' CROSS- Plaintiffs, COMPLAINT ve DEAN GREGORY ASIMOS, dba DRAKE REALTY, Defendant. DEAN GREGORY ASIMOS, dba DRAKE REALTY Cross-Complainant v. JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC., Cross-Defendants COMES NOW CROSS-DEFENDANTS JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC., to answer the unverified allegations in the Cross-Complaint of Dean Gregory Asimos on file herein as follows: GENERAL DENIAL Cross-defendants deny generally and specifically, all and singular, each and every 13642838.1 =1- ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINTallegation of the cross-complaint, and further denies that cross-defendants breached any contract or duty, or were negligent and/or careless or otherwise at fault in and about the matters alleged in said cross-complaint. Cross-defendants further deny that cross-complainant has been injured and/or damaged in any sum, sums, or at all. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-defendants allege that the cross-complaint, and each cause of action contained therein, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-complainant and/or his agents were negligent and/or careless in and about the matters alleged in the cross-complaint, and to the extent said negligence and/or carelessness caused and/or contributed to injuries and/or damages, if any, cross-complainant’s recovery should be barred or proportionately reduced. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-Complainant breached his agreement with cross-defendant Thompson, and is therefore barred from seeking the relief prayed for in his cross-complaint. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-complainant unreasonably failed to mitigate his damages, if any, and his recovery must be barred or reduced accordingly. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The cross-complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred by the applicable statute of limitations, including, but not necessarily limited to, those provided for under the California Code of Civil Procedure §339, et seq., and by any applicable contractual suit time provisions. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-defendants’ conduct was not the cause in fact or the proximate cause of any of the losses alleged in the cross-complaint. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-defendants have not violated any duty, contractual or otherwise, to the cross- 13642838.1 -2- ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINTcomplainant, or to any party, and is not liable or indebted to the cross-complainant, or to any party, for any reason or in any amount. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-complainants’ losses, if any, which are denied, were caused by the negligence, acts, omissions or other fault of persons or entities other than this answering cross-defendant. By reason of the relationship between those persons or entities and cross-complainant, the negligence or other fault of those persons or entities is imputed to cross-complainant and any tecovery by cross-complainant must be reduced in proportion to such negligence or other fault. NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The cross-complaint and each and every cause of action stated therein, is barred by the fact that any such causes of action have been effectively released, discharged, contractually barred, or barred by applicable law. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The cross-complaint is barred by the doctrine of estoppel. ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The cross-complaint, and each cause of action contained therein, is barred by the doctrine of laches. TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-complainant has waived any right to assert any claims for damages or to seek any other relief against cross-defendant by reason of its acts and omissions. THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The cross-complaint is barred by the equitable doctrine of unclean hands. FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Cross-complainant brought his cross-complaint against cross-defendant without reasonable cause and without a good faith belief that ihere was a justifiable controversy under the facts and the law, which warranted the filing of the cross-complaint against this responding cross-defendants. Cross-complainant is in possession of no facts or evidence that would support a good faith claim against cross-defendants. Indeed, cross-defendant Wired Real Estate Group, 13642838.1 -3- ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINTInc. never even had a contract with cross-complainant Asimos. Cross-complainant is therefore responsible for all of cross-defendant's necessary and reasonable defense costs and attorneys fees as a result of cross-complainant’s bad faith in asserting claims he either knew or should have known had no merit. FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE If cross-defendants failed to perform any duty owed to cross-complainant, the performance of such duty was prevented by the doctrines of impossibility and frustration. SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The cross-complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred by the provisions of California Civil Code Section 1473. SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The cross-complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred by the principles of accord and satisfaction. EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Cross-Complaint and each of its causes of action therein, is barred by the doctrine of consent. WHEREFORE, Cross-Defendants pray that Cross-Complainant take nothing by his Cross-Complaint herein; that Cross-Defendants be awarded their costs of suit; attorney’s fees, and for such other and further relief as the Court deems proper. DATED: January 17, 2012 BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY 2C ) —™ 'y C. Todd Attorneys for Pidintiffs and Cross-Defendants JASON EVERETT THOMPSON and WIRED REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC. Felco 13642838.1 -4- ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINTPROOF OF SERVICE Thompson, and Wired Real Estate Group, Inc. v. Asimos, dba Drake Realty San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC-11-514980 Iam employed in the City and County of San Francisco by the law firm of Bullivant Houser Bailey, PC ("the business"), 601 California Street, Suite 1800, San Francisco, CA 94108. 1 am over the age of 18 and not a party to this action. On January 17, 2012, I served the document(s) entitled: ANSWER TO ASIMOS’ CROSS-COMPLAINT upon the following party(ies): Jessica R. Barsotti Eugene Zinovyev Attorneys at Law 5032 Woodminster Ln. Oakland, CA 94602 Tel: 510-530-4078 Fax: 510-530-4725 Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Complainant DEAN GREGORY ASIMOS, dba DRAKE REALTY x] BY MAIL (CCP § 1013(a)): I am readily familiar with the ordinary practice of the business with respect to the collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. I placed a true and correct copy(ies) of the above- titled document(s) in an envelope(s) addressed as above, with first class postage thereon fully prepaid. I sealed the aforesaid envelope(s) and placed it(them) for collection and mailing by the United States Postal Service in accordance with the ordinary practice of the business. Correspondence so placed is ordinarily deposited by the business with the United States Postal Service on the same day. O BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION (CCP § 1013(e), CRC 2.306): I transmitted the document(s) by facsimile transmission by placing it(them) in a facsimile machine (telephone number 415-352-2701) and transmitting it(them) to the facsimile machine telephone number(s) listed above. A transmission report was properly issued by the transmitting facsimile machine. Each transmission was reported as complete and without error. A true and correct copy of the transmission report is attached hereto. [J] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY (CCP § 1013(¢)): Iam readily familiar with the ordinary practice of the business with respect to the collection and processing of correspondence for mailing by Express Mail and other carriers providing for overnight delivery. I placed a true and correct copy(ies) of the above-titled document(s) in an envelope(s) addressed as above, with first class postage thercon fully prepaid. I sealed the aforesaid envelope(s) and placed it(them) for collection and mailing by Express Mail or other carrier for overnight delivery in accordance with the ordinary practice of the business. Correspondence so placed is ordinarily deposited by the business with Express Mail or other carrier on the same day. 13664863.1 -1l- PROOF OF SERVICE(1 BY PERSONAL SERVICE UPON AN ATTORNEY (CCP § 1011(a)): I placed a true and correct copy(ies) of the above-titled document(s) in a sealed envelope(s) addressed as indicated above. I delivered each of said envelope(s) by hand to a receptionist or a person authorized to accept same at the address on the envelope, or, if no person was present, by leaving the envelope in a conspicuous place in the office between the hours of nine in the morning and five in the afternoon. BY PERSONAL SERVICE UPON A PARTY (CCP § 1011(b)): I placed a true and correct copy(ies) of the above-titled document(s) in a sealed envelope(s) addressed as indicated above. I delivered each of said envelope(s) by hand to a person of not less than 18 years of age at the address listed on the envelope, between the hours of eight in the morning and six in the evening. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 17, 2012, at San Francisco, California. vee 2) + Fook 13664863.1 -2- PROOF OF SERVICE