Preview
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
5/3/2016 12:16:14 PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
CAUSE NO. DC-14-14271
JOE HAYES § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff §
§
vs. §
§ 68TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
WEKNOW TECHNOLOGIES, INC. §
and CHARLES CRUMPLEY §
INDIVIDUALLY §
Defendants § OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
DEFENDANTS’ FIFTH AMENDED ANSWER
AND VERIFIED DENIAL
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COME NOW, Defendants WeKnow Technologies, Inc. and Charles Crumpley
(“Defendants”), and file this their Fifth Amended Answer and Verified Denial, and would
respectfully show the Court as follows:
GENERAL DENIAL
Defendants deny each and every, all and singular, the claims contained in Plaintiff’s Second
Amended Petition and any amended or supplemental pleadings, and demand strict proof thereof as
required under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
VERIFIED DENIAL
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 93(4), Defendants allege a defect of parties.
Defendant WeKnow Technologies, Inc. is not an existing corporation.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendants would show that the statute of
limitations bars recovery as to Plaintiff’s DPTA claims against Defendants.
Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendants would show that the alleged breach in
question was the acts or omissions of third parties over whom these Defendants had no control and
DEFENDANTS’ FIFTH AMENDED ANSWER
AND VERIFIED DENIAL—PAGE 1
for whose actions these Defendants cannot be held liable as Southwest Windpower, a third party,
was the manufacturer of the Skystream 600 wind turbines. At the time of purchase, Plaintiff was
aware that the Skystream 600 wind turbines were not currently available for residential use but,
according to Southwest Windpower, the manufacturer, would be available at a later date. In June
2011, WeKnow told Plaintiff that Southwest Windpower, the manufacturer had advised the
Skystream 600s would be available for residential use either late third quarter or early fourth
quarter of 2011. Ultimately, however, Southwest Windpower, the manufacturer never made
Skystream 600s for residential use.
Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendants would show that the alleged breach in
question is barred by the laches because the relief sought by Plaintiff was unreasonably delayed.
Plaintiff waited several years before prosecuting his lawsuit, and consequently, due to the natural
passing of time witnesses have moved and evidence has been destroyed or lost as a result of the
delay.
Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendants would show that the contract could not
be performed due to impossibility because Southwest Windpower, the manufacturer of the
Skystream 600 wind turbine, filed bankruptcy and never manufactured the Skystream 600 wind
turbine for residential use.
CONCLUSION AND PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Defendants WeKnow Technologies, Inc. and Charles Crumpley
respectfully request that the Court enter an order that, upon trial of this matter, Plaintiff take
nothing by way of his claims against Defendants, that Defendants be discharged to recover all
expenses incurred in defense of this matter, and grant Defendants all other and further relief,
either at law or in equity, to which Defendants may show themselves justly entitled.
DEFENDANTS’ FIFTH AMENDED ANSWER
AND VERIFIED DENIAL—PAGE 2
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________
Charlie S. Reed
State Bar No. 24025608
REED LAW, PLLC
10000 N. Central Expy., Suite 400
Dallas, Texas 75231
tel: 214.570.9555
fax: 214.570.9013
charlie@reed-law-firm.com
Attorney for Defendants
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document
has been served on the following counsel of record in accordance with the TEXAS RULES OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE on May 3, 2016:
Via Efile:
H. R. Chapin
15950 North Dallas Parkway, Suite 400
South Tower
Dallas, Texas 75248
______________
CHARLIE S. REED
DEFENDANTS’ FIFTH AMENDED ANSWER
AND VERIFIED DENIAL—PAGE 3
Preview
FILED DALLAS COUNTY 5/3/2016 12:16:14 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK CAUSE NO. DC-14-14271 JOE HAYES § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff § § vs. § § 68TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT WEKNOW TECHNOLOGIES, INC. § and CHARLES CRUMPLEY § INDIVIDUALLY § Defendants § OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANTS’ FIFTH AMENDED ANSWER AND VERIFIED DENIAL TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COME NOW, Defendants WeKnow Technologies, Inc. and Charles Crumpley (“Defendants”), and file this their Fifth Amended Answer and Verified Denial, and would respectfully show the Court as follows: GENERAL DENIAL Defendants deny each and every, all and singular, the claims contained in Plaintiff’s Second Amended Petition and any amended or supplemental pleadings, and demand strict proof thereof as required under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. VERIFIED DENIAL Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 93(4), Defendants allege a defect of parties. Defendant WeKnow Technologies, Inc. is not an existing corporation. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendants would show that the statute of limitations bars recovery as to Plaintiff’s DPTA claims against Defendants. Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendants would show that the alleged breach in question was the acts or omissions of third parties over whom these Defendants had no control and DEFENDANTS’ FIFTH AMENDED ANSWER AND VERIFIED DENIAL—PAGE 1 for whose actions these Defendants cannot be held liable as Southwest Windpower, a third party, was the manufacturer of the Skystream 600 wind turbines. At the time of purchase, Plaintiff was aware that the Skystream 600 wind turbines were not currently available for residential use but, according to Southwest Windpower, the manufacturer, would be available at a later date. In June 2011, WeKnow told Plaintiff that Southwest Windpower, the manufacturer had advised the Skystream 600s would be available for residential use either late third quarter or early fourth quarter of 2011. Ultimately, however, Southwest Windpower, the manufacturer never made Skystream 600s for residential use. Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendants would show that the alleged breach in question is barred by the laches because the relief sought by Plaintiff was unreasonably delayed. Plaintiff waited several years before prosecuting his lawsuit, and consequently, due to the natural passing of time witnesses have moved and evidence has been destroyed or lost as a result of the delay. Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendants would show that the contract could not be performed due to impossibility because Southwest Windpower, the manufacturer of the Skystream 600 wind turbine, filed bankruptcy and never manufactured the Skystream 600 wind turbine for residential use. CONCLUSION AND PRAYER WHEREFORE, Defendants WeKnow Technologies, Inc. and Charles Crumpley respectfully request that the Court enter an order that, upon trial of this matter, Plaintiff take nothing by way of his claims against Defendants, that Defendants be discharged to recover all expenses incurred in defense of this matter, and grant Defendants all other and further relief, either at law or in equity, to which Defendants may show themselves justly entitled. DEFENDANTS’ FIFTH AMENDED ANSWER AND VERIFIED DENIAL—PAGE 2 Respectfully submitted, ____________________________ Charlie S. Reed State Bar No. 24025608 REED LAW, PLLC 10000 N. Central Expy., Suite 400 Dallas, Texas 75231 tel: 214.570.9555 fax: 214.570.9013 charlie@reed-law-firm.com Attorney for Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been served on the following counsel of record in accordance with the TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE on May 3, 2016: Via Efile: H. R. Chapin 15950 North Dallas Parkway, Suite 400 South Tower Dallas, Texas 75248 ______________ CHARLIE S. REED DEFENDANTS’ FIFTH AMENDED ANSWER AND VERIFIED DENIAL—PAGE 3