arrow left
arrow right
  • Lucero, Jennifer et al vs. Dudley, Matthew Thomas et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Lucero, Jennifer et al vs. Dudley, Matthew Thomas et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Lucero, Jennifer et al vs. Dudley, Matthew Thomas et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Lucero, Jennifer et al vs. Dudley, Matthew Thomas et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Lucero, Jennifer et al vs. Dudley, Matthew Thomas et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Lucero, Jennifer et al vs. Dudley, Matthew Thomas et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Lucero, Jennifer et al vs. Dudley, Matthew Thomas et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Lucero, Jennifer et al vs. Dudley, Matthew Thomas et alCivil-Roseville document preview
						
                                

Preview

1 KENNETH S. KATZOFF (SBN 103490) NICOLE C. CAMPBELL (SBN 325516) 2 Katzoff & Riggs LLP 1500 Park Avenue, Suite 300 3 Emeryville, CA 94608 Tel. (510) 597-1990 4 kkatzoff@katzoffriggs.com ncampbell@katzoffriggs.com 5 08/25/2020 CHRISTIAN N. BROWN (SBN 233147) Elevation Law 6 855 N. Lake Blvd., # 1 P.O. Box 5008 7 Tahoe City, CA 96145 Tel. (530) 584-2900 8 chris@elevationlawfirm.com 9 Attorneys for Plaintiffs JENNIFER LUCERO and JAMES D. OLSON 10 KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF PLACER 1500 PARK AVE., SUITE 300 EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 11 (510) 597-1990 UNLIMITED CIVIL JURISDICTION 12 JENNIFER LUCERO, an individual, and ) Case No. S-CV-0045037 JAMES D. OLSON, an individual, ) 13 ) ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, ) OF DEFENDANTS MATTHEW 14 ) THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. v. ) KWAN 15 ) ) 16 ) MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY, et al. ) 17 ) Defendants. ) 18 ____________________________________ ) ) 19 AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION ) ) _____________________________________ ) 20 21 22 ________________________________________________________________ 1 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. KWAN 1 Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants JENNIFER LUCERO and JAMES D. OLSON 2 (“Cross-Defendants”) answers the unverified Cross-Complaint filed against them by 3 Defendants and Cross-Complainants MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. 4 KWAN (“Cross-Complainants”) as follows: 5 1. In answering paragraph 1 of the Cross-Complaint, Cross-Defendants admit 6 only that Cross-Complainants have correctly identified the real property at 2133 Serene 7 Road, Soda Springs, California (the “Property.”) 8 2. Cross-Defendants admit the allegations of paragraphs 2 and 3 of the 9 Cross-Complaint. Cross-Defendants own an undivided fifty percent interest (50%) as 10 community property with a right of survivorship in the fee title to the Property, and as KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP 1500 PARK AVE., SUITE 300 EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 11 tenants in common with Cross-Complainants. (510) 597-1990 12 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 13 (Contribution and Accounting) 14 3. Cross-Defendants incorporate by reference each of the admissions, 15 allegations, and denials in paragraphs 1 through 2 of this Answer set forth above. 16 4. Cross-Defendants allege that paragraph 4 of the Cross-Complaint does not 17 contain any substantive allegation to admit or deny. 18 5. In answering paragraph 5 of the Cross-Complaint, Cross-Defendants admit 19 that Cross-Defendants and Cross-Complainants are tenants in common with each other. 20 6. In answering paragraph 6 of the Cross-Complaint, Cross-Defendants agree 21 that the Property should be partitioned by sale with division of the proceeds. 22 7. In answering paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Cross-Complaint, Cross-Defendants deny all allegations in these paragraphs. ________________________________________________________________ 2 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. KWAN 1 8. In answering paragraph 9 of the Cross-Complaint, Cross-Defendants admit 2 only that the parties maintain a checking account for the purpose of funding expenditures 3 related to the Property. 4 9. In answering paragraphs 10 and 11 of the Cross-Complaint, 5 Cross-Defendants deny all allegations in these paragraphs. 6 10. In answering paragraph 12 of the Cross-Complaint, Cross-Defendants agree 7 the Court should order an accounting according to the principles of equity to determine the 8 charges and credits upon Cross-Defendants’ and Cross-Complainants’ interests in the 9 Property and order allowance, contribution, or other compensatory adjustments before the 10 proceeds of the sale of the Property are divided between Cross-Defendants and KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP 1500 PARK AVE., SUITE 300 EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 11 Cross-Complainants. (510) 597-1990 12 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 13 (Money Had and Received) 11. Cross-Defendants incorporate by reference each of the admissions, 14 allegations, and denials in paragraphs 1 through 10 of this Answer set forth above. 15 12. Cross-Defendants allege that paragraph 13 of the Cross-Complaint does not 16 contain any substantive allegation to admit or deny. 17 13. In answering paragraphs 14 and 15 of the Cross-Complaint, 18 Cross-Defendants deny all allegations in these paragraphs. 19 20 21 22 ________________________________________________________________ 3 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. KWAN 1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (Account Stated/Open Book Account 2 14. Cross-Defendants incorporate by reference each of the admissions, 3 allegations, and denials in paragraphs 1 through 13 of this Answer set forth above. 4 15. Cross-Defendants allege that paragraph 16 of the Cross-Complaint does not 5 contain any substantive allegation to admit or deny. 6 16. In answering paragraphs 17, 18, 19 and 20 of the Cross-Complaint, 7 Cross-Defendants deny all allegations in these paragraphs. 8 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 9 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP 1500 PARK AVE., SUITE 300 (Failure to State a Cause of Action) EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 11 (510) 597-1990 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each of its causes of action 12 are barred by Cross-Complainants’ failure to state a cause of action against 13 Cross-Defendants. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14 (Offset) 15 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint, in whole or in part, is subject to 16 set off due to amounts owed by Cross-Complainants to Cross-Defendants or for which 17 Cross-Defendants otherwise have a right to recover from Cross-Complainants. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 (Statute of Frauds) 19 The Cross-Complaint is barred, in whole or in part, by the provisions of California 20 Civil Code § 1624. 21 22 ________________________________________________________________ 4 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. KWAN 1 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Failure to Mitigate) 3 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each of its causes of action is barred because if Cross-Complainants have sustained, or will sustain, any of the injuries, 4 losses or damages described in the Cross-Complaint, which Cross-Defendants deny, then 5 such injuries, losses, or damages were caused solely, or in part, by the failure of 6 Cross-Complainants to take reasonable steps available to them to mitigate such damages, 7 and to the extent that any such injuries, losses, or damages proven by Cross-Complainants were caused by Cross-Complainants’ own failure to take reasonably available steps to 8 mitigate such damages, they shall not be recoverable against Cross-Defendants. 9 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP 1500 PARK AVE., SUITE 300 (Unclean Hands) EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 11 (510) 597-1990 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each of its causes of action is 12 barred in whole or in part by reason of Cross-Complainants’ inequitable conduct or unclean 13 hands, and the Court should not give Cross-Complainants relief based upon the facts alleged. 14 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 (Estoppel) 16 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each of its causes of action is 17 barred by the doctrine of estoppel. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18 (No Agreement) 19 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each cause of action thereof 20 is barred because no valid agreement was formed between Cross-Complainants and 21 Cross-Defendants to pay or reimburse monies to Cross-Complainants for goods or services related to the Property and thus, there was no meeting of the minds. 22 ________________________________________________________________ 5 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. KWAN 1 EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Waiver) 3 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each of its causes of action is barred because Cross-Complainants have knowingly and voluntarily waived of any 4 purported obligations or liabilities of Cross-Defendants, if any there were. 5 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 6 (Release) 7 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each of its causes of action is barred by virtue of the doctrine of release. 8 TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9 (Failure of Condition) 10 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each cause of action thereof KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP 1500 PARK AVE., SUITE 300 EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 11 is barred because there was a failure of a condition precedent, condition subsequent, or (510) 597-1990 concurrent condition to any purported agreement to pay or reimburse monies to 12 Cross-Complainants for goods or services related to the Property, or any related promise, 13 the existence of which agreement or promise Cross-Defendants deny. 14 ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 (Statute of Limitations) Cross-Defendants allege that Cross-Complaint and each cause of action thereof is 16 barred by the Statute of Limitations, Code of Civil Procedure §§ 318, 320, 321, 322, 325, 17 338, 339(1), and 343. 18 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 19 (Doctrine of Laches) Cross-Complainants have been guilty of unreasonable delay in commencing and in 20 prosecuting the subject civil action, to the irreparable prejudice of Cross-Defendants, and 21 as a result, the Cross-Complaint, and each alleged cause of action herein, is barred by the 22 doctrine of laches. ________________________________________________________________ 6 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. KWAN 1 THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Breach) 3 Cross-Defendants allege that the Cross-Complaint and each cause of action thereof is barred because of a material breach by Cross-Complainants of any purported agreement 4 to pay or reimburse monies to Cross-Complainant for goods or services related to the 5 Property, the existence of which agreement or promise Cross-Defendants deny. 6 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 (Reservation of Additional Defenses) Cross-Defendants allege that because the Cross-Complaint herein is couched in 8 conclusionary terms, Cross-Defendants cannot fully anticipate all affirmative defenses that 9 may be applicable in this action. Accordingly, the right to assert additional affirmative 10 defenses, if and to the extent that such affirmative defenses are applicable, is hereby expressly KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP 1500 PARK AVE., SUITE 300 EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 11 reserved. Further, Cross-Defendants presently have insufficient information or belief (510) 597-1990 concerning the subject matter of the Cross-Complaint to know whether or not there may be 12 additional affirmative defenses available. In the event that discovery or investigation reveals 13 additional such affirmative defenses, Cross-Defendants expressly reserve herein the right to 14 assert the same. PRAYER FOR RELIEF 15 WHEREFORE, Cross-Defendants pray for judgment against Cross-Complaint as 16 follows: 17 1. That the Cross-Complaint, and each and every cause of action therein, be 18 dismissed with prejudice; 19 2. That judgment be rendered in favor of Cross-Defendants 20 3. That Cross-Complainants take nothing and obtain no relief by reason of the 21 Cross-Complaint; 22 ________________________________________________________________ 7 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. KWAN 1 4. For a decree ordering a final accounting according to the principles of equity 2 for all charges upon the Cross-Complainants’ and Cross-Defendants’ interests before the 3 proceeds of the sale of the Property are divided between Cross-Complainants and 4 Cross-Defendants; 5 5. That the Court deny an request for attorneys’ fees or costs made by 6 Cross-Complainants, and provide for an equitable award of reasonable attorneys’ fees 7 incurred or paid by Cross-Defendants in the defense and prosecution of this action 8 according to proof provided to the Court, regarding Cross-Defendants’ actions for the 9 common benefit of all parties and that Cross-Complainants’ actions are not for the common 10 good of the co-owners but were instead to further their private benefit; KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP 1500 PARK AVE., SUITE 300 EMERYVILLE, CA 94608 11 6. For the costs of suit incurred herein, including attorneys’ fees and costs to the (510) 597-1990 12 extent allowed by law; and 13 7. For such other and further relief as the Court deems proper. 14 Dated: August 25, 2020 15 KATZOFF & RIGGS LLP 16 /s/ Nicole C. Campbell _____________________________ 17 By: NICOLE C. CAMPBELL 18 Attorneys for Plaintiffs JENNIFER LUCERO 19 and JAMES D. OLSON 20 21 22 ________________________________________________________________ 8 ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT OF MATTHEW THOMAS DUDLEY AND ALICE T. KWAN UJIAUSS rO iIOOUd I 27, T7, 07, .C TTTOSIN 6t 'erruoJrles'pJe,t\,(eH le' 0z0z 8I 'sz Nn8nv uo pelncexg 'peJJoc puB en.B sr EuroBaJoJ erll l?w ?cueuvJo sslsls pa{un eqt prrB ?rrrJoJrlscJo e}?ls equo s./rlBl etp Jepun fi1uued repun eJ?lc3p I LT "ftnftedJo 'eAoq" pelsfl (ss)sserppe II?Iu-e 9I eql o1pellFusuer fllecruo.rpele eq o]Joererl] fdoc anr u Eutsnec l(q UVru-I yIA tXl SI :Jeuu€ru 8ur.,rto11og oql q (s)eesserppe eloqg eql uo sluetuncop o^oqe oql po^Jes ueql I tl @i F 19196 y3'ee>1cru1 €I -i N LllT,6 y3'o8etq ueg I otlns'peog uod4v oo>lcruI 0OZ0b q