arrow left
arrow right
  • Baystar Holdings Llc Vs Mclaughlin, Kyle D Contract and Indebtedness document preview
  • Baystar Holdings Llc Vs Mclaughlin, Kyle D Contract and Indebtedness document preview
  • Baystar Holdings Llc Vs Mclaughlin, Kyle D Contract and Indebtedness document preview
  • Baystar Holdings Llc Vs Mclaughlin, Kyle D Contract and Indebtedness document preview
  • Baystar Holdings Llc Vs Mclaughlin, Kyle D Contract and Indebtedness document preview
  • Baystar Holdings Llc Vs Mclaughlin, Kyle D Contract and Indebtedness document preview
  • Baystar Holdings Llc Vs Mclaughlin, Kyle D Contract and Indebtedness document preview
  • Baystar Holdings Llc Vs Mclaughlin, Kyle D Contract and Indebtedness document preview
						
                                

Preview

Filing # 90594764 E-Filed 06/05/2019 10:18:05 AM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA CIVIL 898 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH HOLDINGS, LLC, a Foreign Limited Liability Company Plaintiff, Vv. Case No. 18-CA-2183 BAYSTAR HOLDINGS, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company; KYLE D. MCLAUGHLIN, and DANAN JON DELSING, Defendant(s) DANAN JON DELSING, Crossclaim-Plaintiff, v. KYLE MCLAUGHLIN, Crossclaim-Defendant. KYLE MCLAUGHLIN’S ANSWER TO DANAN DELSING’S CROSSCLAIM COMES NOW Kyle McLaughlin, by and through the undersigned, and answers the crossclaim filed by Danan Jon Delsing stating as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted. 7. Admitted for jurisdictional purposes. FILED: COLLIER COUNTY, CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK, 06/05/2019 10:18:05 AM8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Admitted. Denied. Denied. Denied. Jack Newby was not an agent of Kyle McLaughlin. Admitted. Denied. Mr. McLaughlin never agreed to remove Mr. Delsing, as Mr. McLaughlin was not a party to the mediation agreement. Moreover, the Lessor refused to remove Mr. Delsing. 14. 15. 16. Admitted. Denied. Denied. As Mr. McLaughlin is not party to the agreement, clearly this clause does not apply to him. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Without knowledge. Denied. Denied or admitted as previously stated. Admitted. Denied. Admitted. Denied. Admitted. Admitted. Denied.SPECIFIC DENIALS AND DEFENSES 1. Failure to state a cause of action for breach of contract. The Crossclaim Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action for breach of contract as the contract attached clearly shows on its face that Defendant McLaughlin is not a party to the agreement. 2. Jack Newby was not an agent of Kyle McLaughlin. The Plaintiff's claim rests on the unsupported claim that Jack Newby (party to the mediation agreement) was acted on behalf of Kyle McLaughlin. This is not true. First, the agreement doesn’t show that Jack Newby signed on behalf of Kyle McLaughlin. Rather, he signed for himself, and the evidence will show that Mr. Newby has never been an agent of Kyle McLaughlin. 3. The Mediation agreement is unenforceable. The parties to the mediation agreement cannot contractually obligate non-parties like Mr. McLaughlin or 898 Fifth Avenue South Holdings, LLC, to act. 4. Failure to state a cause of action for Count II. The Crossclaim Plaintiff did not label his causes of action. Accordingly, the Defendant has not been put on notice what exactly the Plaintiff is suing him for. To the degree the Plaintiff is attempting to bring a cause of action for promissory estoppel, the crossclaim fails to state the cause of action for promissory estoppel, as the Plaintiff has failed to plead the necessary elements. Specifically, the Plaintiff has failed to plead that his reliance was reasonable and any facts in support thereof. He has also failed to plead that he changed his position in reliance on the alleged promise. Feci Ins. Co. v. Cayce’s Excavation, Inc. 901 So.2d 248, 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. Impossibility of Performance. Even if the Plaintiff could somehow show that Mr. McLaughlin was a party to the mediation agreement, it became impossible to perform the agreement in that the Lessor refused to allow Mr. Delsing to be released from the lease agreement. No party to the mediation agreement contemplated this response from the lessor, and it was not foreseeable to the parties. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing has been emailed to counsel for the Crossclaim Plaintiff on this the 5" of June, 2019 to mcook@ycmlegal.com. /s/ Brantley Oakey Bar No. 99076 The Law Office of Brantley Oakey 780 5" Ave. S, Ste. 200 Naples, FL 34102 239-963-2897 boakey@naplesattomey.biz service@yournaplesattorney.com