Free Answer to Amended Complaint - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

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

Terry Goddard Attorney General Susanna C. Pineda, Bar No. 011293 Assistant Attorney General 1275 W. Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997 Phone: (602) 542-4951 Fax: (602) 542-7670 Attorneys for Defendant Reyna IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Albert DeLeon, No. CV 04-0446-PHX-PGR (MS) Plaintiff, v. Dora Schriro, et al., Defendants. Defendant Adrian Paredez, in his Answer to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint ("Complaint") admits, denies and alleges as follows: 1. Admits that Plaintiff is an inmate confined in the custody of the Arizona DEFENDANT PARADEZ'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Department of Corrections ("ADC"). 2. Admits that during the time frames in question in his Complaint, Plaintiff

was housed in the Arizona State Prison Complex-Florence, and Arizona State PrisonLewis. 3. 4. Admits that Defendant was, at all relevant times, employed by the ADC. Affirmatively alleges that Plaintiff has failed to state any claim upon which

relief can be granted.

Case 2:04-cv-00446-JAT

Document 176

Filed 11/01/2005

Page 1 of 5

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

5.

Defendant denies any and all allegations of wrongdoing set forth in

Plaintiff's Complaint, as well as any other allegations of wrongdoing which may be inferred from the contents of all portions of the Complaint. 6. 7. Defendant denies each and every allegation not specifically admitted. Defendant denies that Plaintiff's constitutional rights were violated,

including Plaintiff's rights under the First and Eighth Amendment. 8. Defendant denies that Plaintiff's rights pursuant to the U.S. Constitution, any

federal statute, Arizona State law or Arizona Department of Corrections rule or regulation were violated by Defendant. 9. This action is barred, at least in part, by the Eleventh Amendment to the

United States Constitution. 10. 11. Defendant possesses absolute and qualified immunity from suit. Any conduct of Defendant towards Plaintiff, if any, was undertaken within

the course and scope of his employment and in conformity with the Constitution, applicable laws, rules, regulations and procedures. 12. Defendant denies that he violated Plaintiff's Constitutional right to be free

deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs or that he retaliated against him for invoking any right given him under the Constitution. 13. 14. 15. Defendant denies that his actions or inactions injured Plaintiff. Defendant denies that he failed to perform any duty required by law. Defendant denies that Plaintiff can receive punitive damages because

Plaintiff cannot show evil intent or motive. 16. Affirmatively alleges that Plaintiff sustained no actual or physical injury as a

result of Defendant's actions or inactions.

2
Case 2:04-cv-00446-JAT Document 176 Filed 11/01/2005 Page 2 of 5

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

17.

Affirmatively alleges that Defendant, at all times alleged herein, acted

professionally and pursuant to legitimate penological interest and in compliance with all constitutional amendments. 18. Affirmatively alleges that Plaintiff's Complaint fails, as a matter of law, to

allege sufficient affirmative involvement on the part of any named Defendant, including himself. Defendant was never a correctional officer in the unit in which Plaintiff alleges the acts took place, 19. Affirmatively alleges that the theory of respondeat superior is insufficient to

support Plaintiff's Complaint. 20. Affirmatively alleges mootness, ripeness, justiciability, standing, arbitration

and award, assumption of the risk, contributory negligence, duress, estoppel, illegality, injury by fellow servant, laches, license, release, claim or issue preclusion or res judicata, statute of limitations, and waiver. 21. Defendant further affirmatively alleges that Plaintiff is not entitled to any

relief as against him. 24. Affirmatively alleges that Plaintiff's medical care met the community

standard of care. 25. Affirmatively alleges that Plaintiff failed to exhaust prison administrative

remedies as are available; and therefore, his claims are barred by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) whether denominated as an affirmative defense, subject matter jurisdiction, quasijurisdictional, abatement or a condition precedent. 26. Affirmatively alleges that the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) of 1996,

42 U.S.C. § 1997 e(e) precludes Plaintiff from seeking damages for mental or emotional injury suffered while in custody without a prior showing of physical injury, for cause of action based upon 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 3
Case 2:04-cv-00446-JAT Document 176 Filed 11/01/2005 Page 3 of 5

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.

Affirmatively alleges that if Plaintiff owes restitution to the victims of his

crime(s), any monetary award made to Plaintiff is subject to set off pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act §§ 807 and 808. 28. At the time of this Answer, Defendant does not know which, if any,

additional affirmative defenses may be supported by the facts developed through discovery. Accordingly, Defendant alleges, as though set forth herein in haec verba, all affirmative defenses set forth in Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, having fully answered Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant Paredez prays that the Court enter an order: 1. 2. Dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint in its entirety with Prejudice; Entry of judgment in favor of Defendant, and that Plaintiff take nothing as a

result thereof, including declaratory relief, injunctive relief, punitive, nominal, special or compensatory damages, and damages for mental suffering and anguish. 3. Awarding Defendant sanctions, including costs and reasonable attorney's

fees incurred in the defense of this frivolous suit, pursuant to FRCP Rule 11; and 4. proper. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 1st day of November, 2005. Terry Goddard Attorney General Awarding Defendant any other and further relief the Court deems just and

s/ Susanna C. Pineda Susanna C. Pineda Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for Defendant Reyna

4
Case 2:04-cv-00446-JAT Document 176 Filed 11/01/2005 Page 4 of 5

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 5
Case 2:04-cv-00446-JAT Document 176 Filed 11/01/2005 Page 5 of 5

Original e-filed this 1st day of November, 2005, with: Clerk of the Court United States District Court District of Arizona 401 West Washington Street, SPC 1 Phoenix, AZ 85003-2118 Copy mailed the same date to: Albert DeLeon, #032814 ASPC ­ Lewis- Morey P.O. Box 3300 Buckeye, AZ 85326 s/ Colleen S. Jordan Secretary to: Susanna C. Pineda IDS04-0271/RSK:G03-03830 #932490