On July 31, 2013 a
Answer
was filed
involving a dispute between
Jackson, Clyde,
and
Executive Towing And Recovery, Inc.,
Gator Carriage Investors Inc,
Gator Carriage Partners, Ltd,
for Other
in the District Court of Broward County.
Preview
*#* FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL HOWARD FORMAN, CLERK 9/10/2013 12:14:09 PM.****
Electronically Filed 09/10/2013 12:14:18 PM ET |
IN THE CIRCUIT COUNTY COURT OF
SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
CLYDE JACKSON, CASE NO.: CACE 13-018081
Plaintiff,
vs.
EXECUTIVE TOWING AND RECOVERY, INC.
a Florida corporation, GATOR CARRIAGE PARTNERS,
LTD, a Florida limited partnership, GATOR CARRIAGE
INVESTORS, INC., a Florida corporation as General
Manager of GATOR CARRIAGE PARTNERS, LTD,
Defendants.
/
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Plaintiff, CLYDE JACKSON (Plaintiff “Jackson”), by and through his undersigned.
attorney, hereby file this Response to Defendant, GATOR CARRIAGE PARTNER, LTD
(Defendant “Gator LTD”) and Defendant GATOR CARRIAGE INVESTOR, INC.
(Defendant “Gator INC.”) (collectively “Defendants”) Affirmative Defenses and says:
1. In Paragraph 32 Defendants attempt to assert a Fabre defense. However,
pursuant to Fabre and the progeny of cases that followed, Defendants must specifically
identify the third party and state with specificity the actions of the third party which
would cause that third party to incur liability in this matter. Defendants failed to make
any such allegation and as such, this Court should strike Paragraph 32 of Defendants’
Affirmative Defenses.
2. Furthermore, Defendants on Paragraph 41 of their Affirmative Defenses
simply reserve the right to amend their Answer and Affirmative Defenses. As this Court
is fully aware, affirmative defenses are in the nature of avoidance to liability.
1Defendants’ Paragraph 41 is not an admission in avoidance that’s simply a right to
amend pleadings. As such, this Court should strike Paragraph 41 of Defendants’
Affirmative Defenses.
3. Plaintiff Jackson denies the remaining Affirmative Defenses as stated by
Defendants in their Answer.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been
furnished by e-mail to Bertha E. Penenori, Esquire, bocalegalmail@libe: utual.com
and bertha,penenori@libertymutual.com on this _/“_ day of September, 2012.
2500 Hollywood Blvd., Ste 212
Hollywood, Fl. 33020
Telephone: (954) 927-3436
Facsimile: (954) 927-4779
Document Filed Date
September 10, 2013
Case Filing Date
July 31, 2013
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
*#* FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL HOWARD FORMAN, CLERK 9/10/2013 12:14:09 PM.**** Electronically Filed 09/10/2013 12:14:18 PM ET | IN THE CIRCUIT COUNTY COURT OF SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CLYDE JACKSON, CASE NO.: CACE 13-018081 Plaintiff, vs. EXECUTIVE TOWING AND RECOVERY, INC. a Florida corporation, GATOR CARRIAGE PARTNERS, LTD, a Florida limited partnership, GATOR CARRIAGE INVESTORS, INC., a Florida corporation as General Manager of GATOR CARRIAGE PARTNERS, LTD, Defendants. / PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Plaintiff, CLYDE JACKSON (Plaintiff “Jackson”), by and through his undersigned. attorney, hereby file this Response to Defendant, GATOR CARRIAGE PARTNER, LTD (Defendant “Gator LTD”) and Defendant GATOR CARRIAGE INVESTOR, INC. (Defendant “Gator INC.”) (collectively “Defendants”) Affirmative Defenses and says: 1. In Paragraph 32 Defendants attempt to assert a Fabre defense. However, pursuant to Fabre and the progeny of cases that followed, Defendants must specifically identify the third party and state with specificity the actions of the third party which would cause that third party to incur liability in this matter. Defendants failed to make any such allegation and as such, this Court should strike Paragraph 32 of Defendants’ Affirmative Defenses. 2. Furthermore, Defendants on Paragraph 41 of their Affirmative Defenses simply reserve the right to amend their Answer and Affirmative Defenses. As this Court is fully aware, affirmative defenses are in the nature of avoidance to liability. 1Defendants’ Paragraph 41 is not an admission in avoidance that’s simply a right to amend pleadings. As such, this Court should strike Paragraph 41 of Defendants’ Affirmative Defenses. 3. Plaintiff Jackson denies the remaining Affirmative Defenses as stated by Defendants in their Answer. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by e-mail to Bertha E. Penenori, Esquire, bocalegalmail@libe: utual.com and bertha,penenori@libertymutual.com on this _/“_ day of September, 2012. 2500 Hollywood Blvd., Ste 212 Hollywood, Fl. 33020 Telephone: (954) 927-3436 Facsimile: (954) 927-4779