Preview
1 Jerry J. Howard (SBN 207206)
Karine F. Wegrzynowicz (SBN 350881)
2 THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP
205 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 100
3
Santa Barbara, California 93101
4 Telephone: (805) 963-9958
Facsimile: (805) 963-3814
5 Email: jhoward@ttfhlaw.com; karinew@ttfhlaw.com
6
Attorneys for Defendants ALEC A. SOUTHGATE
7 and as trustee of the Alec Southgate Revocable Trust
8
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA - ANACAPA DIVISION
THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP
11
Carmen I. Southgate, Individually and as trustee Case No.: 24CV01131
12 of the Carmen Irene Southgate Living Trust (Assigned for all purposes to the Hon. Colleen K.
Sterne, Dept. 5)
13 established January 14, 2003,
14 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT ALEC A. SOUTHGATE’S
vs. ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S
15 COMPLAINT
ALEC A. SOUTHGATE, individually and as
16
trustee of the Alec Southgate Revocable Trust;
17 and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive,
18 Defendants.
19
Complaint Filed: February 28, 2024
20
21
COMES NOW, Defendant, ALEX A. SOUTHGATE, individually and as Trustee of the
22
Alec Southgate Revocable Trust (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”), by and through his
23
attorneys of record, Jerry J. Howard and Karine F. Wegrzynowicz and in support of his answer,
24
hereby alleges as follows:
25
GENERAL DENIAL
26
1. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30(d), Defendant
27
denies generally and specifically each and every allegation of Plaintiff’s Complaint, except that,
28
as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 872.410(a), Defendant does not deny he holds an
1 CASE NO.: 24CV01131
DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
1 equal and equitable interest as tenants in common with Plaintiff in the Subject Property commonly
2 known as 1030 East Cota Street, Santa Barbara, California 93103 with APN 031-242-008.
3 Defendant denies that Plaintiff has been damaged in the manner or amount alleged or in
4 any manner or amount at all by reason of any act or omission by Defendant and further denies
5 that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the remedies requested, including but not limited to, equitable
6 remedies or for the relief requested.
7 In the event of a partition or sale, Defendant claims a right to compensation for his
8 contributions to the property, including without limit, amounts advanced for (a) upkeep and
9 improvements to preserve the property resulting in an enhanced value, (b) to pay for common
10 expenses, and (c) for the common benefit of the property, including but not limited to, payment
THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP
11 of municipal taxes, insurance, and maintenance fees.
12 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
13 Defendant alleges on information and belief the following affirmative defenses:
14 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 (Failure to State a Cause of Action)
16 2. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is
17 barred because it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
18 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
19 (Waiver of Partition)
20 3. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is
21 bared by reason of actions, representations, conduct and/or omissions that Plaintiff waived the
22 right to partition as alleged in the complaint.
23 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
24 (Lack of Standing)
25 4. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant is
26 barred because Plaintiff lacks standing to sue.
27 ///
28 ///
2 CASE NO.: 24CV01131
DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
1 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (Waiver)
3 5. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is
4 barred by reason of Plaintiff’s actions, representations, conduct and/or omissions, and Plaintiff
5 waived each and every alleged cause of action, remedy, and/or other rights against Defendant.
6 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
7 (Estoppel)
8 6. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is
9 barred because Plaintiff is estopped to assert each cause of action, remedy, and/or other right
10 against Defendant by reason of actions, representations, promises, conduct and/or omissions by
THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP
11 Plaintiff.
12 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
13 (Laches)
14 7. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is
15 barred by the doctrine of laches.
16 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
17 (Unclean Hands)
18 8. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is
19 barred by the doctrine of unclean hands.
20 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
21 (Offset)
22 9. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is
23 barred because Defendant is entitled to an offset of all sums found to be owing by Plaintiff to
24 Defendant and any moneys otherwise paid to Plaintiff should be offset by any money or other
25 assets Plaintiff has taken or spent, or waste created or permitted by Plaintiff.
26 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
27 (Unjust Enrichment)
28 10. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is
3 CASE NO.: 24CV01131
DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
1 barred because Plaintiff would be unjustly enriched if allowed to recover.
2 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
3 (Failure to Act in Good Faith)
4 11. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant
5 because Plaintiff breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and by Plaintiff’s actions,
6 representations, conduct and/or omissions failed to act in good faith.
7 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
8 (Reservation of Defenses)
9 12. Defendant currently lacks sufficient information or knowledge upon which to form
10 a belief as to whether it may have additional, as yet unstated, affirmative defenses. Thus, Defendant
THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP
11 reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses in the event that discovery and
12 investigation reveals such defenses.
13 WHEREFORE, Defendants pray for relief as follows:
14 1. The Court not partition the property and that Plaintiff take nothing from this action;
15 2. In the event the Court decrees a partition, that Defendant receive value for his offset
16 and claims for improvements, expenses, and maintenance;
17 3. For costs of suit incurred;
18 4. Any other relief that the Court deems just and proper.
19 REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL
20 Defendant demands a trial by jury.
21
22 Dated: April 22, 2024 THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP
23
24 By: _______________________________
Jerry J. Howard
25 Karine F. Wegrzynowicz
Attorneys for Defendant, ALEC A. SOUTHGATE
26
27
28
4 CASE NO.: 24CV01131
DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
PROOF OF SERVICE
1
Cal. Code of Civil Procedure 1013(a), 2015.5
2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
3 )
4 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA )
5 I am employed in the County of Santa Barbara, State of California. I am over the age of
18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is 205 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 100,
6 Santa Barbara, CA 93101.
7 On April 22, 2024, I served the foregoing document described as DEFENDANT’S
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT upon the interested party(ies) in said action as
8 follows:
9 Scott G. Soulages, Esq.
10 ROGERS, SHEFFIELD & CAMPBELL, LLP
427 E. Carrillo Street
THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP
11 Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Email: ssoulages@rogerssheffield.com
12 Attorney for Plaintiff, CARMEN I. SOUTHGATE
13
☐ BY MAIL: I enclosed the above-described document in (an) envelope(s) with postage
14 thereon fully pre-paid and addressed as set forth on the attached Service List. I am readily familiar
with THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLC’s practice of collection and processing
15 correspondence for mail with the U.S. Postal Service. Pursuant to that practice, I placed the above-
described envelope into the Law Offices’ designated receptacle, of which the contents are to be
16 deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day at, California in the ordinary course of
business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal
17 cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after the date stated herein.
18 ☒ BY ELECTRONIC MAIL: I caused a copy of the document(s) to be sent to the persons
at the e-mail addresses listed above pursuant to CRC 2.251(c) and CCP §1010.6. I did not receive,
19 within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the
transmission was unsuccessful.
20
21 ☒ (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
the above is true and correct.
22
23 ☐ (Federal) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this Court
at whose direction the service was made.
24
25 Executed on April 22, 2024, at Santa Barbara, California.
26
______________________________________
27 Catrina Robblee
28
5 CASE NO.: 24CV01131
DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
Preview
1 Jerry J. Howard (SBN 207206) Karine F. Wegrzynowicz (SBN 350881) 2 THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP 205 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 100 3 Santa Barbara, California 93101 4 Telephone: (805) 963-9958 Facsimile: (805) 963-3814 5 Email: jhoward@ttfhlaw.com; karinew@ttfhlaw.com 6 Attorneys for Defendants ALEC A. SOUTHGATE 7 and as trustee of the Alec Southgate Revocable Trust 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA - ANACAPA DIVISION THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP 11 Carmen I. Southgate, Individually and as trustee Case No.: 24CV01131 12 of the Carmen Irene Southgate Living Trust (Assigned for all purposes to the Hon. Colleen K. Sterne, Dept. 5) 13 established January 14, 2003, 14 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT ALEC A. SOUTHGATE’S vs. ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S 15 COMPLAINT ALEC A. SOUTHGATE, individually and as 16 trustee of the Alec Southgate Revocable Trust; 17 and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, 18 Defendants. 19 Complaint Filed: February 28, 2024 20 21 COMES NOW, Defendant, ALEX A. SOUTHGATE, individually and as Trustee of the 22 Alec Southgate Revocable Trust (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”), by and through his 23 attorneys of record, Jerry J. Howard and Karine F. Wegrzynowicz and in support of his answer, 24 hereby alleges as follows: 25 GENERAL DENIAL 26 1. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30(d), Defendant 27 denies generally and specifically each and every allegation of Plaintiff’s Complaint, except that, 28 as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 872.410(a), Defendant does not deny he holds an 1 CASE NO.: 24CV01131 DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 1 equal and equitable interest as tenants in common with Plaintiff in the Subject Property commonly 2 known as 1030 East Cota Street, Santa Barbara, California 93103 with APN 031-242-008. 3 Defendant denies that Plaintiff has been damaged in the manner or amount alleged or in 4 any manner or amount at all by reason of any act or omission by Defendant and further denies 5 that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the remedies requested, including but not limited to, equitable 6 remedies or for the relief requested. 7 In the event of a partition or sale, Defendant claims a right to compensation for his 8 contributions to the property, including without limit, amounts advanced for (a) upkeep and 9 improvements to preserve the property resulting in an enhanced value, (b) to pay for common 10 expenses, and (c) for the common benefit of the property, including but not limited to, payment THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP 11 of municipal taxes, insurance, and maintenance fees. 12 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 13 Defendant alleges on information and belief the following affirmative defenses: 14 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 (Failure to State a Cause of Action) 16 2. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is 17 barred because it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. 18 SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 19 (Waiver of Partition) 20 3. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is 21 bared by reason of actions, representations, conduct and/or omissions that Plaintiff waived the 22 right to partition as alleged in the complaint. 23 THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 24 (Lack of Standing) 25 4. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant is 26 barred because Plaintiff lacks standing to sue. 27 /// 28 /// 2 CASE NO.: 24CV01131 DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 1 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Waiver) 3 5. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is 4 barred by reason of Plaintiff’s actions, representations, conduct and/or omissions, and Plaintiff 5 waived each and every alleged cause of action, remedy, and/or other rights against Defendant. 6 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 (Estoppel) 8 6. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is 9 barred because Plaintiff is estopped to assert each cause of action, remedy, and/or other right 10 against Defendant by reason of actions, representations, promises, conduct and/or omissions by THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP 11 Plaintiff. 12 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13 (Laches) 14 7. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is 15 barred by the doctrine of laches. 16 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 (Unclean Hands) 18 8. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is 19 barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. 20 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21 (Offset) 22 9. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is 23 barred because Defendant is entitled to an offset of all sums found to be owing by Plaintiff to 24 Defendant and any moneys otherwise paid to Plaintiff should be offset by any money or other 25 assets Plaintiff has taken or spent, or waste created or permitted by Plaintiff. 26 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 27 (Unjust Enrichment) 28 10. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant, is 3 CASE NO.: 24CV01131 DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 1 barred because Plaintiff would be unjustly enriched if allowed to recover. 2 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 3 (Failure to Act in Good Faith) 4 11. The Complaint, including its purported cause(s) of action against Defendant 5 because Plaintiff breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and by Plaintiff’s actions, 6 representations, conduct and/or omissions failed to act in good faith. 7 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 8 (Reservation of Defenses) 9 12. Defendant currently lacks sufficient information or knowledge upon which to form 10 a belief as to whether it may have additional, as yet unstated, affirmative defenses. Thus, Defendant THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP 11 reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses in the event that discovery and 12 investigation reveals such defenses. 13 WHEREFORE, Defendants pray for relief as follows: 14 1. The Court not partition the property and that Plaintiff take nothing from this action; 15 2. In the event the Court decrees a partition, that Defendant receive value for his offset 16 and claims for improvements, expenses, and maintenance; 17 3. For costs of suit incurred; 18 4. Any other relief that the Court deems just and proper. 19 REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL 20 Defendant demands a trial by jury. 21 22 Dated: April 22, 2024 THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP 23 24 By: _______________________________ Jerry J. Howard 25 Karine F. Wegrzynowicz Attorneys for Defendant, ALEC A. SOUTHGATE 26 27 28 4 CASE NO.: 24CV01131 DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT PROOF OF SERVICE 1 Cal. Code of Civil Procedure 1013(a), 2015.5 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 3 ) 4 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA ) 5 I am employed in the County of Santa Barbara, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is 205 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 100, 6 Santa Barbara, CA 93101. 7 On April 22, 2024, I served the foregoing document described as DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT upon the interested party(ies) in said action as 8 follows: 9 Scott G. Soulages, Esq. 10 ROGERS, SHEFFIELD & CAMPBELL, LLP 427 E. Carrillo Street THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLP 11 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Email: ssoulages@rogerssheffield.com 12 Attorney for Plaintiff, CARMEN I. SOUTHGATE 13 ☐ BY MAIL: I enclosed the above-described document in (an) envelope(s) with postage 14 thereon fully pre-paid and addressed as set forth on the attached Service List. I am readily familiar with THYNE TAYLOR FOX HOWARD, LLC’s practice of collection and processing 15 correspondence for mail with the U.S. Postal Service. Pursuant to that practice, I placed the above- described envelope into the Law Offices’ designated receptacle, of which the contents are to be 16 deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day at, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal 17 cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after the date stated herein. 18 ☒ BY ELECTRONIC MAIL: I caused a copy of the document(s) to be sent to the persons at the e-mail addresses listed above pursuant to CRC 2.251(c) and CCP §1010.6. I did not receive, 19 within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. 20 21 ☒ (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. 22 23 ☐ (Federal) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this Court at whose direction the service was made. 24 25 Executed on April 22, 2024, at Santa Barbara, California. 26 ______________________________________ 27 Catrina Robblee 28 5 CASE NO.: 24CV01131 DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT