Jump to content

So I went to the courthouse today


Recommended Posts

I went to our itty bitty courthouse and asked the circuit clerk for a copy of their small court rules. Completely worthless as it's all about how to file suit. I gave him back the summons and service forms and told him I didn't need them, I was the defendant. You should have seen the look on his face - apparently they don't have too many defendants who actually defend themselves LOL.

I am going to file my answer soon. Any comments or suggestions are appreciated.

ANSWER OF THE DEFENDANT

Defendant, appearing pro se, for its reply to the Complaint naming [PLAINTIFF] plaintiff as follows: All answers correspond to the numbered paragraphs of the Complaint. All allegations of the Complaint are denied unless expressly admitted herein.

1. Admit

2. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averment and therefore denies.

3. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averment and therefore denies.

4. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averment and therefore denies.

AS AND FOR AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff’s complaint and each cause of action therein fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the Defendant for which relief can be granted. Defendant alleges that the document(s) the Plaintiff attached to their petition is not sufficient evidence with which the Court can grant relief.

2. The Plaintiff failed to attach a copy of Charge Agreement referenced in Complaint to the original complaint as is required by Illinois Supreme Court Rule 282(a).

3. Plaintiff has not presented authenticated evidence showing [PLAINTIFF] has standing to file suit in the State of Illinois.

4. [ATTORNEY] has not proven they were retained by [PLAINTIFF] as its representative in this matter.

5. [ATTORNEY] has not proven that [PLAINTIFF] is the real party in interest. Defense demands proof of ownership, specifically that the alleged account is still the legal property of [PLAINTIFF] with all of the original creditor’s rights and privileges intact.

6. Defendant alleges that this action is time barred.

7. Defendant alleges that this action is barred by the doctrine of laches.

8. Defendant reserves the right to plead other affirmative defenses that may become applicable and/or available at a later time.

WHEREFORE, the Defendant prays that the Plaintiff’s action be dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice.

Again, any suggestions welcome. Stuff to add or subtract?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest chuckygee

Looks good except for a couple of items in the middle are legal arguments and not affirmative defenses.

2. Claim is deficient. (then what you said)

3. Lack of Standing. (then your description why)

Drop 4. Argue that later

5. Not real party of interest. (Then what you said)

Generally you list the affirmative defense first and then the explanation why follows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks good except for a couple of items in the middle are legal arguments and not affirmative defenses.

2. Claim is deficient. (then what you said)

3. Lack of Standing. (then your description why)

Drop 4. Argue that later

5. Not real party of interest. (Then what you said)

Generally you list the affirmative defense first and then the explanation why follows.

Thanks. That's one of my concerns, I don't want to leave something out and not be able to argue it later, but I don't want to argue it too much in the answer, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.