Free Answer to Crossclaim - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-01146-LTB-CBS

Document 44

Filed 08/26/2005

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-WM-1146 (CBS) GARY S. COHEN, Plaintiff, v. INFOLINK SCREENING SERVICES, INC., a California corporation; and PHOENIX RESEARCH, INC., an Ohio corporation, Defendants.

DEFENDANT INFOLINK SCREENING SERVICES, INC'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT PHOENIX RESEARCH, INC'S CROSS-CLAIMS

Defendant Infolink Screening Services, Inc. ("Infolink"), by and through its attorneys, C. Todd Drake and Stephen J. Hensen of Tiemeier & Hensen, P.C., and by way of its and Answer and Affirmative Defenses to defendant Phoenix Research, Inc.'s ("Phoenix") Cross-Claims, hereby admits, denies and otherwise avers as follows: ANSWER TO GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. With respect to paragraph 1 of the Cross-Claims, Infolink incorporates by

reference its responses to the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-44 of Plaintiff's Complaint. 2. 3. Infolink admits the allegations of paragraph 2 of the Cross-Claims. Infolink admits the allegations of paragraph 3 of the Cross-Claims but

specifically denies any allegation or inference that it had a duty to provide the name of the company requesting information concerning Plaintiff.

Case 1:04-cv-01146-LTB-CBS

Document 44

Filed 08/26/2005

Page 2 of 5

4.

Infolink admits the allegations of paragraph 4 of the Cross-Claims but

specifically denies any allegation or inference that it had a duty to provide the address or telephone number of Plaintiff. ANSWER TO FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Negligence) 5. Infolink affirmatively states that the allegations of paragraph 5 of the

Cross-Claims constitute a legal conclusion and therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, Infolink states that the cited federal regulations speak for themselves and otherwise denies the allegations of paragraph 5. 6. Infolink denies the allegations of paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Cross-Claims. ANSWER TO SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Deceit Based on Fraud) 7. Infolink affirmatively states that the allegations of paragraph 8 of the

Cross-Claims constitute a legal conclusion and therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, Infolink states that the cited federal regulations speak for themselves and otherwise denies the allegations of paragraph 8. 8. 9. Infolink denies the allegations of paragraph 9 of the Cross-Claims. Infolink affirmatively states that the allegations of paragraph 10 of the

Cross-Claims constitute a legal conclusion and therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, Infolink is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 10, and therefore denies same. 10. Infolink denies the allegations of paragraph 11 of the Cross-Claims.

Case 1:04-cv-01146-LTB-CBS

Document 44

Filed 08/26/2005

Page 3 of 5

11.

Infolink is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as

to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 12 of the Cross Claims, and therefore denies same. 12. Claims. ANSWER TO THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Indemnification) 13. Infolink affirmatively states that the allegations of paragraph 15 of the Infolink denies the allegations of paragraphs 13 and 14 of the Cross

Cross-Claims constitute a legal conclusion and therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed necessary, Infolink states that the cited federal regulations speak for themselves and otherwise denies the allegations of paragraph 15. 14. Claims. 15. Paragraphs 19 and 20 of the Cross Claims do not contain any factual Infolink denies the allegations of paragraphs 16 through 18 of the Cross

allegations and therefore no response is required. Infolink specifically denies any claim for indemnification or contribution by Phoenix. 16. Infolink denies all allegations of the Cross Claims not specifically

admitted herein, including the allegations, if any, of the Wherefore clause. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Having fully set forth its answer to the Cross Calims, Infolink hereby submits the following affirmative defenses: A. B. The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Phoenix has failed to mitigate its damages, if any.

Case 1:04-cv-01146-LTB-CBS

Document 44

Filed 08/26/2005

Page 4 of 5

C.

Phoenix may not be the real party in interest with respect to all or a part of

his claimed damages. D. Phoenix's claims for damages are a result of the acts or omissions of third

persons or entities over which Infolink had no control, nor right of control and for whose actions Infolink is not responsible. E. Phoenix's claims are barred because any act or omission by Infolink was

not the proximate cause of the damages and injuries, if any, to Phoenix. F. Phoenix's claims are barred or diminished by virtue of its own

comparative negligence. G. Phoenix is hereby notified that although any wrongdoing is expressly

denied, any judgment of liability of Infolink is limited to the degree of negligence or fault, if any, attributable to Infolink. H. Phoenix's claims are frivolous and groundless, thereby entitling Infolink

to an award of attorney fees and costs. I. Infolink reserves the right to plead additional affirmative defenses based

on information learned during the course of discovery or otherwise. WHEREFORE, having fully set forth its Answer and Affirmative Defenses, Infolink respectfully requests that judgment enter in its favor and against Phoenix on all Cross Claims, that the Cross Claims be dismissed with prejudice and that Infolink be awarded its attorney fees, costs and such other and further relief as is just and proper.

Case 1:04-cv-01146-LTB-CBS

Document 44

Filed 08/26/2005

Page 5 of 5

DATED this 26th day of August, 2005. Respectfully submitted, TIEMEIER & HENSEN, P.C.

s/ C. Todd Drake C. Todd Drake Stephen J. Hensen 1515 Arapahoe Street, Suite 1300 Denver CO 80202 Telephone: 303-572-1515 Attorneys for Defendant Infolink Screening Services, Inc.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 26th day of August, 2005, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was e-filed and served via Pacer CM/ECF, upon the belownoted individuals: Marc F. Bendinelli, Esq. Bendinelli Law Office, P.C. 11184 Huron Street, Suite 10 Denver, CO 80234 Kyle Seedorf, Esq. Snell & Wilmer, L.L.P. 1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 1900 Tabor Center Denver, CO 80202

s/ Michael Jensen