Free Answer to Complaint - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00117-MPT

Document 72

Filed 05/07/2008

Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE TAMMY HURD, Plaintiff, v. DELAWARE STATE UNIVERSITY and DANDESON PANDA, individually and in his official capacity, Defendants. : : : : : : : : : : :

C.A. No. 07-117

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ANSWER 1. This paragraph states a Legal Conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied. 2. This paragraph states a Legal Conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied. 3. This paragraph states a Legal Conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied. 4. Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information as to admit or deny. To the extent a response is required it is denied. 5. This paragraph is not directed towards answering Defendant and therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied. 6. This paragraph is not directed towards answering Defendant and therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied. 7. Denied.

Case 1:07-cv-00117-MPT

Document 72

Filed 05/07/2008

Page 2 of 6

8.

Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information as to admit or deny.

9. 10.

Admitted. a) b) c) d) e) f) g) Denied. Denied. Denied. Denied. Denied. Denied. Denied.

11. 12.

Denied. The paragraph is not directed towards answering Defendant therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

13.

Answering Defendant is without sufficient information or knowledge to admit or deny. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

14.

Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information as to admit or deny. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

15.

Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information as to admit or deny. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

16.

Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information as to admit or deny. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

17.

Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information as to admit or deny. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

Case 1:07-cv-00117-MPT

Document 72

Filed 05/07/2008

Page 3 of 6

18.

Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information as to admit or deny. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

Denied. Denied. Denied. Denied. Answering Defendant reasserts responses 1-22 and hereby realleges and incorporates them by reference as is fully set forth herein.

24.

This paragraph states a Legal Conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

25. 26.

Denied. Answering Defendant reasserts responses 1-25 and incorporates herein by reference as is fully set forth herein.

27. 28. 29.

Denied. Denied. Answering Defendant realleges responses 1-28 and incorporates herein by reference as is fully set forth herein.

30.

This paragraph states a Legal Conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

31.

This paragraph states a Legal Conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required it is denied.

32. 33.

Denied. Denied.

Case 1:07-cv-00117-MPT

Document 72

Filed 05/07/2008

Page 4 of 6

34.

Answering Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information as to admit or deny. To the extent a response is required it is denied. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff has failed to state claims upon which relief can be granted. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's claims are barred in whole, or in part, by her failure to mitigate his damages. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's Due Process claims must be dismissed since Plaintiff has failed to allege any procedural rights she was denied. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Defendant has no individual liability under Title IX or Title VI, as he was not a grant recipient of federal funds, and the complaint against him under those statues fails to state a claim. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE To the extent Defendant is individually liable he is entitled to qualified immunity. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Any claim against Defendant in his official capacity is tantamount to a claim against DSU and therefore the claim against Defendant Panda should be dismissed.

Case 1:07-cv-00117-MPT

Document 72

Filed 05/07/2008

Page 5 of 6

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's claims for punitive damages must be dismissed as they are not available under Title IX or Title VI and because a hostile environment is not cognizable under Title IX.

WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully request that this Court dismiss the Complaint with prejudice, enter judgment in Defendants' favor and award Defendant his costs and attorneys' fees, and such other relief as this Court may deem proper and appropriate. RICHARD R. WIER, JR., P.A.

__/s/ Richard R. Wier, Jr.______ Richard R. Wier, Jr. (#716) Daniel W. Scialpi (#4359) 1220 Market St., Suite 600 Wilmington, DE 19801 (302)888-3222 [email protected]

Case 1:07-cv-00117-MPT

Document 72

Filed 05/07/2008

Page 6 of 6