Free Response - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 266.3 kB
Pages: 4
Date: October 10, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 475 Words, 2,784 Characters
Page Size: 617.76 x 811.44 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22966/149.pdf

Download Response - District Court of Connecticut ( 266.3 kB)


Preview Response - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-01036-DJS Document 149 Filed 10/10/2006 Page 1 014
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
CALI. CFNTFR "I)l:ZCI—lNI_ILOOIES. : CI`v'II. ACTION NO. 3:03CVl036
{DIS]
Plainti HZ
1*.
GRANI) AI]"·r'I€T*ITIjRI€S `l`OUR &
'I`RA"·»’EI. PIJBIJSI-IING C·Dl·II’{JR.A`l`ION.
IN'I`|€Rl..Il\ii?`I`I?et·1t‘¤»’Iil. & TOUR. INC.
Defendants. : {`JCTODIiI·t 9. 2006
PLAIN'I`IFF’S REPL"If' TO DEFENIIANT*S SPECIAL DEFENSES
The Plaintiff Call Center `I`ee11neIegies: Ine. ["CCI"'}t reapenda te [}eIi:ndat1t`e
Special Defenses dated It-·Ia;r I0. 2006 as t`nIItiw:.·1 L
AS TO THE FIRST SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied:
AS TO THE SECOND SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied:
AS TO THE THIRD SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied:
AS TO THE FOURTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied;
AS TO THE FIFTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied:

Case 3:03—cv—01036-DJS Document 149 Filed 10/10/2006 Page 2 014
AS 'I`·D· THE SIX SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied:
AS TD THE SEVENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied:
AS TD THE EICHTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied;
AS TU THE NINTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied;
.AS TD THE TENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied:
AS TD TIIE ELEVENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied;
AS TD TIIE TWELVE SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied:
AS TD THE THIRTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied;
AS TD THE FDTTRTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied;
AS T·D THE FIFTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
Denied.

Case 3:03—cv—01036-DJS Document 149 Filed 10/10/2006 Page 3 014
Tl IE PLAINTIFF
By fsf Kevin P. Chamberlin
Kevin P. Chainberlin
39 Mill Plain Read, Suite ll]
Danbury Cl {1631 l
Federal Bar #— ct26S-43
Phnne: 203-T92-GUI 1
Fax: 2133-?92—33`Fl}
Ci1arnl:•er1a»w·3·T§J}am1l.c0m

Case 3:03-cv-01036-DJS Document 149 Filed 10/10/2006 Page 4 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT CUI] RT
DISTRICT {IF CIINNECTICIIT
CALL CljT‘~l'l`I£R `l`l·ZCl-Il\I{`Jl.{I1tCilliS. : CIVII. AC'l`lCtl‘¤l NU. 3:l]3CV1t]36
{DIS)
Plaintifli
v.
GRAl*~lI1ADVt£H`l`ttRES 'l`t`lI_lR &
TRAVEL PtJDt.lSH[NCi CGRPURATIUIV.
II¤l`t`ERLINE TRAVEL Etc 'IUIJR, INC.
Defendants. : CrL"l`{]·I-IIQR *1. 2tl·Ut'>
CERTIFICATE DF SERVICE
I Iteteby ec1‘tit`y that en Ctcteber 9, Etltlti. a eepy ef teregeing pleading. was tiled
electrenically and served by mail en anyene unable te accept etectrettic tiling. Netice ei`
this tiling will be sent by email te all parties by eperatien et`tl1c ceurt`s electrenic tiling
as indicated en the i*~letice et` lileetrenic Filing. Parties may access this tiling threugli the
Ct'tll1tl“l1H Cl‘vL·‘lECl* System.
fsf Kevin P. Chamberlin
Kevin P. Chamhcrliti
Federal Bar Ne. et2t‘iH43
3*} lvlill Plain Read. Suite lt]
Danbury. CT DSSI]
Phene; EDS-WE-titll l
Fax: EU}-T92-33TD
Cl1amberlaw3 [i§§.ael.eem