Free Answer to Complaint - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-00074-IEG-NLS

Document 11

Filed 03/03/2008

Page 1 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

RICHARD M. BARNETT, Esq. Attorney at Law #65132 105 West F Street, 4th Floor San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (6l9) 231-1182 Attorney for Claimant MELISSA ARCHAMBAULT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 COMES NOW the Claimant, MELISSA ARCHAM BAULT, and in answer to Plaintiff's 23 Complaint for Forfeiture, hereby responds, alleges, and otherwise pleads as follows: 24 1. 25 Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 26 2. 27 Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 28 3. Answering Paragraph 3. of the Complaint, Claimant has no information or belief 1 Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 2. of the Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 1. of the ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) $23,120.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, ) ) ONE 2007 CHEVROLET AVALANCHE ) TRUCK, CA LICENSE NO. 8E38789, ) VIN 3GNEC12J17G138443, ITS TOOLS ) AND APPURTENANCES, ) ) ONE 2003 AUDI QUATTRO SEDAN, ) CA LICENSE NO. 5LKB440, ) VIN WAULC68E73A197008, ITS TOOLS ) AND APPURTENANCES, ) ) $1,200.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY, ) ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) Case No. 08-CV-0074(IEG)NLS ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR FORFEITURE

Case 3:08-cv-00074-IEG-NLS

Document 11

Filed 03/03/2008

Page 2 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

sufficient to enable her to answer the allegations contained therein, and basing her denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation contained therein in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 4. Answering Paragraph 4. of the Complaint, Claimant hereby incorporates her

responses to Paragraphs 1-3 herein as if fully repeated herein. 5. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 5. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 6. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 6. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive.. 7. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 7. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 8. Answering Paragraph 8. of the Complaint, Claimant has no information or belief

sufficient to enable her to answer the allegations contained therein, and basing her denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation contained therein in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 9. Answering Paragraph 9. of the Complaint, Claimant hereby incorporates her

responses to Paragraphs 1-8 herein as if fully repeated herein. 10. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 10. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 11. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 11. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 12. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 12. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 13. Answering Paragraph 13. of the Complaint, Claimant has no information or belief

sufficient to enable her to answer the allegations contained therein, and basing her denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation contained therein in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 14. Answering Paragraph 14. of the Complaint, Claimant has no information or belief 2

Case 3:08-cv-00074-IEG-NLS

Document 11

Filed 03/03/2008

Page 3 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

sufficient to enable her to answer the allegations contained therein, and basing her denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation contained therein in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 15. Answering Paragraph 15. of the Complaint, Claimant hereby incorporates her

responses to Paragraphs 1-14 herein as if fully repeated herein 16. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 16. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 17. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 17.of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 18. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 18. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 19. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 19. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 20. Answering Paragraph 20. of the Complaint, Claimant has no information or belief

sufficient to enable her to answer the allegations contained therein, and basing her denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation contained therein in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 21. Answering Paragraph 21. of the Complaint, Claimant has no information or belief

sufficient to enable her to answer the allegations contained therein, and basing her denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation contained therein in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 22. Answering Paragraph 4. of the Complaint, Claimant hereby incorporates her

responses to Paragraphs 1-22 herein as if fully repeated herein. 23. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 23. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 24. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 24. of the

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 25. Claimant denies each and every allegation set forth in Paragraph 25. of the 3

Case 3:08-cv-00074-IEG-NLS

Document 11

Filed 03/03/2008

Page 4 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Complaint for Forfeiture in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. 26. Answering Paragraph 26. of the Complaint, Claimant has no information or belief

sufficient to enable her to answer the allegations contained therein, and basing her denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation contained therein in the conjunctive as well as the disjunctive. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE(S) FIRST AFFIRM ATIVE DEFENSE For a further and separate answer to the Complaint, Claimant alleges the subject Complaint as pled fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the defendant property. SECOND AFFIRM ATIVE DEFENSE For a further and separate answer to the Complaint, Claimant alleges plaintiff lacked probable cause for the institution of the forfeiture action. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE For a further and separate answer to the Complaint, Claimant alleges that the forfeiture in ther case is disproportionate, and is a violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE For a further and separate answer to the Complaint, Claimant alleges that the searches which led to the seizure of the defendant currency and vehicles violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. l. That the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice; 2. That the subject property be returned to Claimant; /// /// /// ///

4

Case 3:08-cv-00074-IEG-NLS

Document 11

Filed 03/03/2008

Page 5 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3. For reasonable attorney's fees herein and costs of suit; and 4. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just.

DATED: March 3, 2008 /s/ Richard M. Barnett RICHARD M. BARNETT, ESQ. [email protected] Attorney for Claimant MELISSA ARCHAMBAULT

5

Case 3:08-cv-00074-IEG-NLS

Document 11

Filed 03/03/2008

Page 6 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, RICHARD M. BARNETT, do hereby state: That I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. That my business address is 105 West F Street, 4th Floor, San Diego, California. That on March 3, 2008, I have caused service of Answer to Complaint for Forfeiture on the following party by electronically filing the foregoing with the Clerk of the District Court using its ECF System, which electronically notifies said party: 1. David McNees, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, Attorney for Plaintiff. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the 3rd day of March, 2008, at San Diego, California.

/s/ Richard M. Barnett RICHARD M. BARNETT

6