Should Affirmative Defenses Have Explanation?

[Learnin]

Regarding an Answer's Affirmative Defenses:

 

Mostly in samples and examples and templates across the internet and scholar.google.com legal documents, I see  'As first affirmative defense, defendant alleges (for example) lack of standing'.

 

In a couple I see 'As first affirmative defense, defendant alleges lack of standing due to X and Y'.

 

One Answer I saw even included a multi page 'statement of facts' supporting the affirmative defenses.

 

 

Common sense tells me there should be -some- amount of explanation to support the affirmative defense.  But most examples from big time lawfirms and gov't lawyers show otherwise.  Cal CCP 430.30 just says the answer must contain  "(2) A statement of any new matter constituting a defense."

 

It's my understanding that a trial brief does all the explaining etc, but seems like, just like the 'face of the complaint' must hold enough cause of action and claim upon which relief can be granted, the face of an Answer should contain enough....something.

 

 

So my question is, how much should an Affirmative defense say/explain?

 

 

 

 

[Anon Amos]

So my question is, how much should an Affirmative defense say/explain?

I would only list the affirmative defense, and at the most a sentence explaining. Unclean hands... Plaintiff should be barred from the bringing of this suit under the doctrine of clean hands for actions taken with dirty hands.

SOL...Plaintiff should be barred from the filing of this suit as the statute of limitations has run on the alleged debt.

You do not have to argue your case in the answer.

[Learnin]

Thanks.  Aff defense with a sentence or two.  Works for me.

[shellieh98]

plus you don't want to give them a heads up on their deficiencies if you don't have to.