Sunteți pe pagina 1din 3

STATE OF COLUMBIA CAPITOL COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

Mary E. Johnson, )
) DEFENDANT’S ANSWER
Plaintiff, ) AND COUNTERCLAIM
) Civil Action File No. 0000
v. )
)
Arthur Hendricks, )
)
Defendant. )

COUNT 1

Defendant, Arthur Hendricks, provides the following Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint.

1. Defendant admits to paragraph 4.

2. Defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 5.

3. Defendant lacks knowledge sufficient to form a belief regarding the truth of the

allegation in paragraph 5.

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff caused her own injuries, if any, by placing glass in her mouth and then

proceeded to eat the glass and is therefore barred from recovery.

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff was more than 50 percent negligent in causing the accident, and is therefore

barred from recovery.

COUNTERCLAIM

FURTHER, AND BY WAY OF A COUNTERCLAIM, defendant, Hendricks, alleges as

follows:

1. Hendricks incorporates by reference his responses to allegations as set forth above.


2. On, March 5th 2010 Plaintiff, Mary E. Johnson, purchased a chocolate éclair from

defendant’s store located in Legalville, and left without incident from the store.

3. Plaintiff, Johnson, did not eat the éclair in the store. The Plaintiff took the wrapped and

boxed chocolate éclair and left.

4. Defendant, Hendricks, does not use any glass products in the preparation of his desserts

and states that are no glass products kept in the preparation and baking areas.

5. Plaintiff, Johnson, falsely accuses the defendant of placing glass in the éclair.

6. The Plaintiff caused her own internal injuries and is attempting to use this suit to falsely

gain money from the defendant. She slanderously told many people about the incident,

which has affected the defendant’s life and business as storeowner.

7. As a result of Plaintiff’s fraudulent action of eating glass, she has caused her own internal

injuries. She has further slandered the reputation of the defendant, causing a significant

loss of business and revenue in the past two months.

8. By reason of the foregoing, defendant, Hendricks, has been damaged in the amount of

$6,000.00 and in such further amounts as may be proven at trial.

WHEREFORE, Defendant demands judgment: (i) dismissing the Complaint in its


entirety; (ii) awarding to Defendant the costs and disbursements of this action; (iii) awarding
Defendant the relief requested in his Counterclaim; (iv) granting such other relief as this Court
deems just and proper.

Date: May 9, 2010 _______________________________


Jane Doe
Doe Law Firm LLC
406 E. First Avenue
Legalville, Columbia 55316
Phone: 612-555-0000
License Number: 123456
doe@doelaw.com
Grade 50 out of 50.0

Comments

Sandra - Very good! You did a great job on the Answer and Counterclaim. The content you
provided is exactly what is needed to make a response. Your denials and admissions are well
done, and the counterclaim is very well written. Very nice job! :)

C. Kennedy, Paralegal Instructor