Preview
PLD-050
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY STATE BAR NUMBER: FOR COURT USE ONLY
NAME: Ian A. Rambarran (SBN 227366), C. Nicole Pelcic (SBN 219167)
FIRM NAME: Klinedinst, PC
STREET ADDRESS: 501 West Broadway, Suite 1100
CITY: San Diego STATE: CA ZIP CODE: 92101
TELEPHONE NO.: 619-400-8000 FAX NO.: 619-238-8707
EMAIL ADDRESS: irambarran@klinedinstlaw.com, npelcic@klinedinstlaw.com
ATTORNEY FOR (name): Defendants NewRez, LLC, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB,
dba CHRISTIANA TRUST
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SONOMA
STREET ADDRESS: 3055 Cleveland Avenue
MAILING ADDRESS: 3055 Cleveland Avenue
CITY AND ZIP CODE: Santa Rosa, CA 95403
BRANCH NAME:
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: FRANK AFLAGUE, CATHERINE LUELLEN-AFLAGUE
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: NEWREZ, LLC, et al.
CASE NUMBER:
GENERAL DENIAL 24CV00549
If you want to file a general denial, you MUST use this form if the amount asked for in the complaint or the value of the property
involved is $1,000 or less.
You MAY use this form for a general denial if
1. The complaint is not verified; or
2. The complaint is verified and the case is a limited civil case (the amount in controversy is $35,000 or less),
BUT NOT if the complaint involves a claim for more than $1,000 that has been assigned to a third party for collection.
(See Code of Civil Procedure sections 85–86, 90–100, 431.30, and 431.40.)
1. DEFENDANT (name): NEWREZ, LLC dba Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB,
generally denies each and every allegation of plaintiff's complaint. dba CHRISTIANA TRUST
2. DEFENDANT states the following FACTS as separate affirmative defenses to plaintiff's complaint (attach additional
pages if necessary):
See Attachment A
Date: May 22, 2024
C. Nicole Pelcic
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY)
If you have a claim for damages or other relief against the plaintiff, the law may require you to state your claim in a special pleading
called a cross-complaint or you may lose your right to bring the claim. (See Code of Civil Procedure sections 426.10–426.40.)
The original of this General Denial must be filed with the clerk of this court with proof that a copy was served on each plaintiff's
attorney and on each plaintiff not represented by an attorney. There are two main ways to serve this General Denial: by personal
delivery or by mail. It may be served by anyone at least 18 years of age EXCEPT you or any other party to this legal action. Be sure
that whoever serves the General Denial fills out and signs a proof of service. You may use the applicable Judicial Council form (such
as form POS-020, POS-030, or POS-040) for the proof of service.
Page 1 of 1
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 431.30, 431.40
Judicial Council of California GENERAL DENIAL www.courts.ca.gov
PLD-050 [Rev. January 1, 2024]
ATTACHMENT A
Affirmative Defenses
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to State Cause of Action)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint, and each and
every cause of action or purported cause of action contained therein, fails to state facts sufficient
to constitute a cause of action against Defendants.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Estoppel)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs, by their own acts
and/or omissions, are estopped from recovering at all against Defendants.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Waiver)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs, by their own acts
and/or omissions, have waived their rights, if any, to recover against Defendants.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to Mitigate Damages)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate
their damages, if any, in connection with the matters referred to in the Complaint, and that such
failure to mitigate bars and/or diminishes Plaintiffs' recovery, if any, against Defendants.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Uncertainty)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the causes of action in the
Complaint, and each of them, are uncertain and ambiguous as to identity, nature, and terms of the
contract and/or contractual relationship upon which Plaintiffs base their claim for damages
against Defendants.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Laches)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the causes of action contained
in the Complaint, and each of them are barred by the doctrine of laches, in that Plaintiffs have
unreasonably delayed in bringing these claims, and said delays have prejudiced Defendants.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Unclean Hands)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that by reason of their conduct,
Plaintiffs are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands from taking any relief sought in the
Complaint.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure of Others to Exercise Reasonable Care)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that if they are subjected to any
liability herein, it will be due in whole, or in part, to the acts and/or omissions of other
defendants and/or other parties unknown at tits time, and any recovery obtained by Plaintiffs
should be barred or reduced according to law, up to and including the whole thereof.
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Statute of Limitations)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint, and each and
every cause of action or purported cause of action contained therein, is barred by all applicable
statutes of limitation, including but not limited to, Code of Civil Procedure sections 337, 337.1,
337.15, 338, and 343.
TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Unjust Enrichment)
As a separate, affirmative defense, Defendants allege that any recovery by Plaintiffs
against Defendants under the Complaint would constitute unjust enrichment by Plaintiffs and is
therefore barred.
ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Attorneys’ Fee Inappropriate)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint, and each and
every cause of action listed therein, fails to state facts sufficient to support an award of damages
for attorneys’ fees, expert witness fees, and other litigation fees, costs, and expenses as against
Defendants.
TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Consent/Acquiescence)
As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs' claims are barred in whole or in part because
Plaintiffs consented to, ratified, or acquiesced in all of the alleged acts or omissions alleged.
THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Conduct of Other Parties)
If Plaintiffs suffered or sustained any loss, injury, damage or detriment, it was directly
and proximately caused and contributed to by the breach, conduct, acts, omissions, activities,
carelessness, recklessness, negligence, or intentional misconduct of others, and not by
Defendants.
FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to Join Parties)
As a separate affirmative defense, the injuries or damages of which Plaintiffs complain
were caused in whole or in part by non-parties whom Plaintiffs have failed to join in this action.
FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(No Actual Damages)
Plaintiffs have suffered no actual damages and any damages claimed in the Complaint are
impermissibly speculative and cannot be recovered from Defendants.
SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Off-set)
As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs' recovery, if any, is subject to a set-off.
SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Standing)
As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs lack standing to assert one or more causes of
action in the Complaint.
EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Plaintiffs' Negligence)
As a separate, affirmative defense, Defendants allege that, to the extent Plaintiffs suffered
any loss by reason of any of the matters alleged in the Complaint, or in any of the purposed
causes of action contained therein, that any such loss was the result of Plaintiffs' own negligence
and Plaintiffs may therefore not recover damages from Defendants.
NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Complaint Brought Without Reasonable Care of Without Good Faith)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint was brought
without reasonable care and without a good faith belief that there was a justifiable controversy
under the facts and the law which warranted the filing of the Complaint against Defendants, and
that Plaintiffs should be responsible for all of Defendants' necessary and reasonable defense
costs, including attorneys' fees.
TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Res Judicata)
As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the doctrine of res
judicata.
TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE
(Collateral Estoppel)
As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the doctrine of
collateral estoppel.
TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Excuse, Exemption, Justification)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint and all purported
claims for relief alleged in the Complaint are barred to the extent the alleged violations of law
are excused, exempted, or justified under the statutes or regulations under which Plaintiffs have
sued.
TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Third Party)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint and all purported
claims for relief alleged in the Complaint are barred in whole or in part because Plaintiffs' injury
or injuries, if any, was/were caused by third parties acting outside the scope of agency,
employment or control of Defendants.
TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Good Faith)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that at all times relevant to this suit,
Defendants' actions were taken in good faith and they had reasonable grounds for believing those
actions did not violate any law.
TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Preemption)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege federal law preempts some or all of
Plaintiffs' claims asserted under State law.
TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Ratification)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs ratified the alleged
acts or omissions of which they complain and each and every claim for relief in the Complaint is
therefore barred by such ratification.
TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Lack of Causation)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that no acts or omissions of
Defendants were or could have been a substantial factor in bringing about Plaintiffs' alleged
damages, nor has any act or omission on the part of Defendants been a contributing cause of the
alleged damages, and any alleged act or omission of Defendants was superseded by the acts or
omissions of others, including Plaintiffs, which were the independent, intervening, and
proximate cause(s) of injuries or damages, if any, sustained by Plaintiffs.
TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to Perform; Default)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege without admitting that any
enforceable contract existed between Plaintiffs and Defendants, that to the extent any such
agreement existed, Plaintiffs' causes of action are barred due to their own failure to perform and
default.
TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Bona Fide Error)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege any act or omission alleged by
Plaintiffs was not performed with actual knowledge or knowledge fairly implied on the basis of
objective circumstances that the particular conduct was unlawful and was, in fact, bona fide
error.
THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Mistake)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege the Complaint is barred by reason of
the provisions of California Civil Code sections 1567, 1576, 1577, and 1578 respecting mistake
of fact and law.
THIRTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Failure to Comply with Statute)
As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs failed to comply with the statutory
requirements of any statute implicated in the Complaint, and thus cannot obtain relief from this
Court against Defendants.
THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Compliance with Statutes)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants have complied with all relevant statutes,
including the FCRA, CCRAA, and RESPA, governing the relationship, if any, between Plaintiffs
and Defendants regarding the alleged conduct of Defendants in the Complaint.
THIRTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Reasonable Procedures)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants have complied with all relevant statutes,
including the FCRA, CCRAA, and RESPA, governing the relationship, if any, including but not
limited to the safe harbor provision in maintaining reasonable procedures to comply between
Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding the alleged conduct of Defendants in the Complaint.
THIRTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
(Additional Defenses)
As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants may have additional defenses that cannot
be articulated due to Plaintiffs' failure to particularize their claims, due to the fact that
Defendants do not have copies of certain documents bearing Plaintiffs' alleged claims and due to
Plaintiffs' failure to provide more specific information concerning the nature of damage claims
and claims for certain causes which Plaintiffs allege Defendants may share some responsibility.
Defendants therefore reserve the right to assert additional defenses upon further particularization
of Plaintiffs' claims, upon examination of documents provided, upon discovery of further
information concerning the alleged damage claims and claims for cause and upon the
development of other pertinent information.
1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2 Frank Aflague, et al. v. NewRez, LLC, et al.
Case No. 24CV00549
3
STATE OF ARIZONA, COUNTY OF MARICOPA
4
At the time of service, I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. I
5 am employed in the County of Maricopa, State of Arizona. My business address is 501
West Broadway, Suite 1100, San Diego, California 92101.
6
On May 22, 2024, I served true copies of the following document(s) described as
7 GENERAL DENIAL on the interested parties in this action as follows:
8 Allison Cecchini Erggelet ace@acecalifornialaw.com
ACE California Law
9 3810 Midvale Avenue Attorney for Plaintiffs
Oakland, CA 94602
10
BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: I caused a copy of the
11 document(s) to be sent from e-mail address abearden@klinedinstlaw.com to the persons at
the e-mail addresses listed in the Service List. I did not receive, within a reasonable time
501 WEST BROADWAY, SUITE 600
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101
12 after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was
unsuccessful.
13
KLINEDINST PC
BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE: Complying with Arizona Rules of Civil
14 Procedure, rule 5(c), my electronic business address is abearden@klinedinstlaw.com and I
caused such document(s) to be electronically served through the Turbo Court system for
15 the above-entitled case to those parties on the Service List maintained on its website for
this case. The file transmission was reported as complete and a copy of the Filing/Service
16 Receipt will be maintained with the original document(s) in our office.
17 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Arizona that the
foregoing is true and correct.
18
Executed on May 22, 2024, at Tempe, Arizona.
19
20 /s/ Amy Bearden
21 Amy Bearden
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
Preview
PLD-050 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY STATE BAR NUMBER: FOR COURT USE ONLY NAME: Ian A. Rambarran (SBN 227366), C. Nicole Pelcic (SBN 219167) FIRM NAME: Klinedinst, PC STREET ADDRESS: 501 West Broadway, Suite 1100 CITY: San Diego STATE: CA ZIP CODE: 92101 TELEPHONE NO.: 619-400-8000 FAX NO.: 619-238-8707 EMAIL ADDRESS: irambarran@klinedinstlaw.com, npelcic@klinedinstlaw.com ATTORNEY FOR (name): Defendants NewRez, LLC, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, dba CHRISTIANA TRUST SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SONOMA STREET ADDRESS: 3055 Cleveland Avenue MAILING ADDRESS: 3055 Cleveland Avenue CITY AND ZIP CODE: Santa Rosa, CA 95403 BRANCH NAME: PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: FRANK AFLAGUE, CATHERINE LUELLEN-AFLAGUE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: NEWREZ, LLC, et al. CASE NUMBER: GENERAL DENIAL 24CV00549 If you want to file a general denial, you MUST use this form if the amount asked for in the complaint or the value of the property involved is $1,000 or less. You MAY use this form for a general denial if 1. The complaint is not verified; or 2. The complaint is verified and the case is a limited civil case (the amount in controversy is $35,000 or less), BUT NOT if the complaint involves a claim for more than $1,000 that has been assigned to a third party for collection. (See Code of Civil Procedure sections 85–86, 90–100, 431.30, and 431.40.) 1. DEFENDANT (name): NEWREZ, LLC dba Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, generally denies each and every allegation of plaintiff's complaint. dba CHRISTIANA TRUST 2. DEFENDANT states the following FACTS as separate affirmative defenses to plaintiff's complaint (attach additional pages if necessary): See Attachment A Date: May 22, 2024 C. Nicole Pelcic (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY) If you have a claim for damages or other relief against the plaintiff, the law may require you to state your claim in a special pleading called a cross-complaint or you may lose your right to bring the claim. (See Code of Civil Procedure sections 426.10–426.40.) The original of this General Denial must be filed with the clerk of this court with proof that a copy was served on each plaintiff's attorney and on each plaintiff not represented by an attorney. There are two main ways to serve this General Denial: by personal delivery or by mail. It may be served by anyone at least 18 years of age EXCEPT you or any other party to this legal action. Be sure that whoever serves the General Denial fills out and signs a proof of service. You may use the applicable Judicial Council form (such as form POS-020, POS-030, or POS-040) for the proof of service. Page 1 of 1 Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 431.30, 431.40 Judicial Council of California GENERAL DENIAL www.courts.ca.gov PLD-050 [Rev. January 1, 2024] ATTACHMENT A Affirmative Defenses FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State Cause of Action) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint, and each and every cause of action or purported cause of action contained therein, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against Defendants. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Estoppel) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs, by their own acts and/or omissions, are estopped from recovering at all against Defendants. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Waiver) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs, by their own acts and/or omissions, have waived their rights, if any, to recover against Defendants. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Mitigate Damages) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their damages, if any, in connection with the matters referred to in the Complaint, and that such failure to mitigate bars and/or diminishes Plaintiffs' recovery, if any, against Defendants. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Uncertainty) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the causes of action in the Complaint, and each of them, are uncertain and ambiguous as to identity, nature, and terms of the contract and/or contractual relationship upon which Plaintiffs base their claim for damages against Defendants. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Laches) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the causes of action contained in the Complaint, and each of them are barred by the doctrine of laches, in that Plaintiffs have unreasonably delayed in bringing these claims, and said delays have prejudiced Defendants. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Unclean Hands) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that by reason of their conduct, Plaintiffs are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands from taking any relief sought in the Complaint. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure of Others to Exercise Reasonable Care) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that if they are subjected to any liability herein, it will be due in whole, or in part, to the acts and/or omissions of other defendants and/or other parties unknown at tits time, and any recovery obtained by Plaintiffs should be barred or reduced according to law, up to and including the whole thereof. NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Statute of Limitations) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint, and each and every cause of action or purported cause of action contained therein, is barred by all applicable statutes of limitation, including but not limited to, Code of Civil Procedure sections 337, 337.1, 337.15, 338, and 343. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Unjust Enrichment) As a separate, affirmative defense, Defendants allege that any recovery by Plaintiffs against Defendants under the Complaint would constitute unjust enrichment by Plaintiffs and is therefore barred. ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Attorneys’ Fee Inappropriate) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint, and each and every cause of action listed therein, fails to state facts sufficient to support an award of damages for attorneys’ fees, expert witness fees, and other litigation fees, costs, and expenses as against Defendants. TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Consent/Acquiescence) As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs' claims are barred in whole or in part because Plaintiffs consented to, ratified, or acquiesced in all of the alleged acts or omissions alleged. THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Conduct of Other Parties) If Plaintiffs suffered or sustained any loss, injury, damage or detriment, it was directly and proximately caused and contributed to by the breach, conduct, acts, omissions, activities, carelessness, recklessness, negligence, or intentional misconduct of others, and not by Defendants. FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Join Parties) As a separate affirmative defense, the injuries or damages of which Plaintiffs complain were caused in whole or in part by non-parties whom Plaintiffs have failed to join in this action. FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Actual Damages) Plaintiffs have suffered no actual damages and any damages claimed in the Complaint are impermissibly speculative and cannot be recovered from Defendants. SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Off-set) As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs' recovery, if any, is subject to a set-off. SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Standing) As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs lack standing to assert one or more causes of action in the Complaint. EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Plaintiffs' Negligence) As a separate, affirmative defense, Defendants allege that, to the extent Plaintiffs suffered any loss by reason of any of the matters alleged in the Complaint, or in any of the purposed causes of action contained therein, that any such loss was the result of Plaintiffs' own negligence and Plaintiffs may therefore not recover damages from Defendants. NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Complaint Brought Without Reasonable Care of Without Good Faith) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint was brought without reasonable care and without a good faith belief that there was a justifiable controversy under the facts and the law which warranted the filing of the Complaint against Defendants, and that Plaintiffs should be responsible for all of Defendants' necessary and reasonable defense costs, including attorneys' fees. TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Res Judicata) As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata. TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE (Collateral Estoppel) As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel. TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Excuse, Exemption, Justification) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint and all purported claims for relief alleged in the Complaint are barred to the extent the alleged violations of law are excused, exempted, or justified under the statutes or regulations under which Plaintiffs have sued. TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Third Party) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that the Complaint and all purported claims for relief alleged in the Complaint are barred in whole or in part because Plaintiffs' injury or injuries, if any, was/were caused by third parties acting outside the scope of agency, employment or control of Defendants. TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Good Faith) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that at all times relevant to this suit, Defendants' actions were taken in good faith and they had reasonable grounds for believing those actions did not violate any law. TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Preemption) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege federal law preempts some or all of Plaintiffs' claims asserted under State law. TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Ratification) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs ratified the alleged acts or omissions of which they complain and each and every claim for relief in the Complaint is therefore barred by such ratification. TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Lack of Causation) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege that no acts or omissions of Defendants were or could have been a substantial factor in bringing about Plaintiffs' alleged damages, nor has any act or omission on the part of Defendants been a contributing cause of the alleged damages, and any alleged act or omission of Defendants was superseded by the acts or omissions of others, including Plaintiffs, which were the independent, intervening, and proximate cause(s) of injuries or damages, if any, sustained by Plaintiffs. TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Perform; Default) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege without admitting that any enforceable contract existed between Plaintiffs and Defendants, that to the extent any such agreement existed, Plaintiffs' causes of action are barred due to their own failure to perform and default. TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Bona Fide Error) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege any act or omission alleged by Plaintiffs was not performed with actual knowledge or knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances that the particular conduct was unlawful and was, in fact, bona fide error. THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Mistake) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants allege the Complaint is barred by reason of the provisions of California Civil Code sections 1567, 1576, 1577, and 1578 respecting mistake of fact and law. THIRTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Comply with Statute) As a separate affirmative defense, Plaintiffs failed to comply with the statutory requirements of any statute implicated in the Complaint, and thus cannot obtain relief from this Court against Defendants. THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Compliance with Statutes) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants have complied with all relevant statutes, including the FCRA, CCRAA, and RESPA, governing the relationship, if any, between Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding the alleged conduct of Defendants in the Complaint. THIRTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Reasonable Procedures) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants have complied with all relevant statutes, including the FCRA, CCRAA, and RESPA, governing the relationship, if any, including but not limited to the safe harbor provision in maintaining reasonable procedures to comply between Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding the alleged conduct of Defendants in the Complaint. THIRTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Additional Defenses) As a separate affirmative defense, Defendants may have additional defenses that cannot be articulated due to Plaintiffs' failure to particularize their claims, due to the fact that Defendants do not have copies of certain documents bearing Plaintiffs' alleged claims and due to Plaintiffs' failure to provide more specific information concerning the nature of damage claims and claims for certain causes which Plaintiffs allege Defendants may share some responsibility. Defendants therefore reserve the right to assert additional defenses upon further particularization of Plaintiffs' claims, upon examination of documents provided, upon discovery of further information concerning the alleged damage claims and claims for cause and upon the development of other pertinent information. 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 Frank Aflague, et al. v. NewRez, LLC, et al. Case No. 24CV00549 3 STATE OF ARIZONA, COUNTY OF MARICOPA 4 At the time of service, I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. I 5 am employed in the County of Maricopa, State of Arizona. My business address is 501 West Broadway, Suite 1100, San Diego, California 92101. 6 On May 22, 2024, I served true copies of the following document(s) described as 7 GENERAL DENIAL on the interested parties in this action as follows: 8 Allison Cecchini Erggelet ace@acecalifornialaw.com ACE California Law 9 3810 Midvale Avenue Attorney for Plaintiffs Oakland, CA 94602 10 BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: I caused a copy of the 11 document(s) to be sent from e-mail address abearden@klinedinstlaw.com to the persons at the e-mail addresses listed in the Service List. I did not receive, within a reasonable time 501 WEST BROADWAY, SUITE 600 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101 12 after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. 13 KLINEDINST PC BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE: Complying with Arizona Rules of Civil 14 Procedure, rule 5(c), my electronic business address is abearden@klinedinstlaw.com and I caused such document(s) to be electronically served through the Turbo Court system for 15 the above-entitled case to those parties on the Service List maintained on its website for this case. The file transmission was reported as complete and a copy of the Filing/Service 16 Receipt will be maintained with the original document(s) in our office. 17 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Arizona that the foregoing is true and correct. 18 Executed on May 22, 2024, at Tempe, Arizona. 19 20 /s/ Amy Bearden 21 Amy Bearden 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1