Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 20

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

JAMES R. JARVIS and AMELIA E. JARVIS, )


ANDRE D. MONTGOMERY and BONITA R. )
MONTGOMERY, ALLARD J. NAYADLEY )
And JANET L. NAYADLEY, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
) Case No. 1:17-cv-00172
Vs. )
)
HAMILTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT )
OF EDUCATION, TENNESSEE )
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDRENS )
SERVICES, HAMILTON COUNTY, )
TENNESSEE, HAMILTON COUNTY )
DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE, )
MARSHALL N. PINKSTON, and FRED R. )
SMITH, JR., personally and Individually and )
Jointly and severally, )
)
Defendants. )

ANSWER

Defendants, Hamilton County Department of Education (HCDE) and Fred R. Smith,

Jr., (Smith)(collectively HCDE Defendants) by and through counsel, respond to the

Plaintiffs allegations in their Complaint as follows.

1. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Complaint.

2. These Defendants deny any such violations.

3. These Defendants admit this Court has jurisdiction over Federal claims, but these

Defendants deny any such claims, and these Defendants further deny any supplemental

jurisdiction for state law claims.

4. These Defendants specifically deny all acts complained of arose in Hamilton

County, TN. The remaining allegations of Paragraph 4 are admitted by these Defendants.

1
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 79
5. These Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the

Complaint.

6. These Defendants deny any incidents gave rise to any claim of the Plaintiffs, but

these Defendants admit Mr. Smith served as Superintendent of Schools as the times described in

the Complaint. Any remaining allegations are denied.

7. These Defendants are aware Mr. Pinkston is the DA for Hamilton County.

8. These Defendants are aware of DCS.

9. These Defendants are aware of Hamilton County Government.

10. These Defendants HCDE and Smith admit the allegations contained in paragraph

10 of the Complaint.

11. These Defendants admit the first sentence of the allegations contained in

paragraph 11 of the Complaint. These Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained with the second and third sentence of the

allegations in Paragraph 11 of the Complaint. The remainder of the allegations contained in

paragraph 11 are admitted.

12. These Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 12 of the

Complaint.

13. These Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the matters asserted in Paragraph 13 of the Complaint.

14. These Defendants affirmatively assert the allegations of paragraph 14 are so

vague that no response is required.

15. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of the Complaint, but

deny that the actions as alleged were timely or that authorities were properly notified.

2
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 2 of 20 PageID #: 80
16. These Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 16 of the

Complaint.

17. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 17 of the

Complaint.

18. These allegations are vague and do not appear to be directed at these Defendants,

and therefore, no response is required. In the alternative, these Defendants are aware of the

proceedings conducted by DA Pinkston. These Defendants are also aware of the involvement of

the Pittman County District Attorney and the Sevierville Police Departments proceedings

related to the incident described on December 22, 2017, but these Defendants had no

involvement in either DA Pinkstons activities nor the Sevierville PD or DAs office.

19. The allegations of Paragraph 19 are vague, and such allegations do not appear to

be directed at these Defendants, and therefore, no response is required. In the alternative, these

Defendants are aware of the proceedings described in Paragraph 19, but these Defendants lack

knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in paragraph 19

of the Complaint.

20. The allegations of Paragraph 20 are vague, and such allegations do not appear to

be directed at these Defendants, and therefore, no response is required. In the alternative, these

Defendants are aware of the proceedings described in Paragraph 20, but these Defendants lack

knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the allegations contained in paragraph 19

of the Complaint.

21. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 21 of the

Complaint.

3
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 3 of 20 PageID #: 81
22. These Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of the

Complaint.

23. These Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the matters asserted in Paragraph 23 of the Complaint.

24. These Defendants are aware of the indictment, but these Defendant lack

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to any remaining allegations of Paragraph

24 of the Complaint.

25. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 25 of the

Complaint.

26. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the

Complaint.

27. These Defendants are aware of the dismissal, but these Defendants lack

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations

of Paragraph 27, and these Defendants object to the legal conclusions stated therein.

28. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 28 of the

Complaint.

29. Defendants admit that Amelia Jarvis is the wife James R. Jarvis. The remainder

of the allegations contained in paragraph 29 of the Complaint are denied.

30. Defendants admit that Bonita R. Montgomery is the wife of Andre D.

Montgomery. The remainder of the allegations contained in paragraph 30 of the Complaint are

denied.

31. Defendants admit that Janet Nayadley is the wife of Allard J. Nayadley. The

remainder of the allegations contained in paragraph 31 of the Complaint are denied.

4
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 4 of 20 PageID #: 82
32. These Defendants responses herein in paragraphs 1-32 are incorporated herein.

These Defendants deny any act or omission by any of these Defendants violated any of the

Plaintiffs rights as alleged in paragraph 32 of the Complaint. These Defendants deny any Joint

and Several Liability for any allegations. Any remaining allegations are denied.

33. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 33 of the

Complaint.

34. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 34 of the

Complaint.

35. These Defendants responses to paragraphs 1-34 of the Complaint are incorporated

herein. The remaining allegations in Paragraph 35 of the Complaint are denied.

36. These Defendants admit Mr. Smith was appointed Superintend of Schools by the

Hamilton County Department of Education. Any further allegations are denied.

37. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 37 of the

Complaint.

38. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 38 of the

Complaint.

39. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 39 of the

Complaint.

40. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Complaint.

41. These Defendants responses to Paragraphs 1-40 of the Complaint are incorporated

herein. The remaining allegations of Paragraph 41 are denied by these Defendants.

42. These Defendants deny any misreporting or misrepresentations to the Public, and

therefore, these Defendants deny the allegations of Paragraph 42. To the extent any duties were

5
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 5 of 20 PageID #: 83
owed by the Defendants to the Plaintiffs, these Defendants affirmatively assert all duties were

complied with. Any remaining allegations are denied.

43. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 43 of the

Complaint.

44. The allegations of Paragraph 44 are not directed at these Defendants, but these

Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the

matters asserted in paragraph 44 of the Complaint.

45. The allegations of Paragraph 45 are not directed at these Defendants, but these

Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the

matters asserted in paragraph 44 of the Complaint.

46. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 46 of the

Complaint.

47. Denied. The Plaintiffs have no legal cause of action as described, and these

Defendants specifically assert Failure to State a Claim as an affirmative defense as well as the

Statute of Limitations as well as requesting a denial of supplemental jurisdiction for the Federal

Court to hear any state law complaints. These Defendants also assert the Tennessee

Governmental Tort Liability Act as an affirmative defense to any state law claims. These

Defendants also affirmatively assert Qualified Immunity and Sovereign Immunity as affirmative

defenses to any of the alleged claims.

48. These Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the matters asserted in paragraph 48 of the Complaint.

49. Denied. The Plaintiffs have no legal cause of action as described, and these

Defendants specifically assert Failure to State a Claim as an affirmative defense as well as the

6
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 6 of 20 PageID #: 84
Statute of Limitations as well as requesting a denial of supplemental jurisdiction for the Federal

Court to hear any state law complaints. These Defendants also assert the Tennessee

Governmental Tort Liability Act as an affirmative defense to any state law claims. These

Defendants also affirmatively assert Qualified Immunity and Sovereign Immunity as affirmative

defenses to any of the alleged claims.

50. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-49 of this Answer as if fully set forth herein. The Plaintiffs have no legal cause of

action as described, and these Defendants specifically assert Failure to State a Claim as an

affirmative defense as well as the Statute of Limitations as well as requesting a denial of

supplemental jurisdiction for the Federal Court to hear any state law complaints. These

Defendants also assert the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act as an affirmative defense

to any state law claims. These Defendants also affirmatively assert Qualified Immunity and

Sovereign Immunity as affirmative defenses to any of the alleged claims.

51. Denied. The Plaintiffs have no legal cause of action as described, and these

Defendants specifically assert Failure to State a Claim as an affirmative defense as well as the

Statute of Limitations as well as requesting a denial of supplemental jurisdiction for the Federal

Court to hear any state law complaints. These Defendants also assert the Tennessee

governmental Tort Liability Act as an affirmative defense to any state law claims. These

Defendants also affirmatively assert Qualified Immunity and Sovereign Immunity as affirmative

defenses to any of the alleged claims.

52. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-51 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs.

7
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 7 of 20 PageID #: 85
53. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 53 of the

Complaint.

54. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-53 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs.

55. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 55 of the

Complaint.

56. There is no paragraph 56 alleged in the Complaint.

57. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-55 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

58. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 58 of the

Complaint.

59. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 59 of the

Complaint.

60. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 60 of the

Complaint.

61. Denied. The Plaintiffs have no legal cause of action as described, and these

Defendants specifically assert Failure to State a Claim as an affirmative defense as well as the

Statute of Limitations as well as requesting a denial of supplemental jurisdiction for the Federal

Court to hear any state law complaints. These Defendants also assert the Tennessee

Governmental Tort Liability Act as an affirmative defense to any state law claims. These

8
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 8 of 20 PageID #: 86
Defendants also affirmatively assert Qualified Immunity and Sovereign Immunity as affirmative

defenses to any of the alleged claims.

62. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-61 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

63. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 63 of the

Complaint.

64. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 64 of the

Complaint.

65. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 65 of the

Complaint.

66. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 66 of the

Complaint.

67. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 67 of the

Complaint.

68. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 68 of the

Complaint.

69. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 69 of the

Complaint.

70. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 70 of the

Complaint.

71. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 71 of the

Complaint.

9
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 9 of 20 PageID #: 87
72. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 72 of the

Complaint.

73. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 73 of the

Complaint.

74. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 74 of the

Complaint.

75. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-74 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

76. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 76 of the

Complaint.

77. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 77 of the

Complaint.

78. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 78 of the

Complaint.

79. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 79 of the

Complaint.

80. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 80 of the

Complaint.

81. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 81 of the

Complaint.

10
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 10 of 20 PageID #: 88
82. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-81 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

83. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 83 of the

Complaint.

84. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 84 of the

Complaint.

85. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 85 of the

Complaint.

86. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 86 of the

Complaint.

87. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 87 of the

Complaint.

88. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 88 of the

Complaint.

89. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-88 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

90. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 90 of the

Complaint.

91. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 91 of the

Complaint.

11
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 89
92. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 92 of the

Complaint.

93. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 93 of the

Complaint.

94. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 94 of the

Complaint.

95. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 95 of the

Complaint.

96. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 96 of the

Complaint.

97. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 97 of the

Complaint.

98. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 98 of the

Complaint.

99. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 99 of the

Complaint.

100. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 100 of the

Complaint.

101. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-100 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

102. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 102 of the

Complaint.

12
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 12 of 20 PageID #: 90
103. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-102 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

104. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 104 of the

Complaint.

105. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 105 of the

Complaint.

106. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 106 of the

Complaint.

107. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-106 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

108. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 108 of the

Complaint.

109. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 109 of the

Complaint.

110. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 110 of the

Complaint.

111. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 111 of the

Complaint.

112. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 112 of the

Complaint.

13
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 13 of 20 PageID #: 91
113. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 113 of the

Complaint.

114. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 114 of the

Complaint.

115. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 115 of the

Complaint.

116. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 116 of the

Complaint.

117. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-116 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are

denied.

118. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 118 of the

Complaint.

119. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 119 of the

Complaint.

120. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 120 of the

Complaint.

121. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 121 of the

Complaint.

122. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 122 of the

Complaint.

14
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 14 of 20 PageID #: 92
123. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 123 of the

Complaint.

124. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 124 of the

Complaint.

125. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 125 of the

Complaint.

126. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 126 of the

Complaint.

127. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-126 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are

denied.

128. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 128 of the

Complaint.

129. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 129 of the

Complaint.

130. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 130 of the

Complaint.

131. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 131 of the

Complaint.

132. These Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 132 of the Complaint.

15
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 15 of 20 PageID #: 93
133. These Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

Pinkstons actions or decisions, but these Defendants deny any misrepresentations. Any

remaining allegations are denied.

134. These Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the allegations of paragraph 134 of the Complaint.

135. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 135 of the

Complaint.

136. These Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the truth of the matters asserted in Paragraph 136.

137. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 137 of the

Complaint.

138. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 138 of the

Complaint.

139. These Defendants incorporate their responses and affirmative defenses set forth in

Paragraphs 1-138 of this Answer, and these Defendants deny any further allegations. These

Defendants specifically deny any liability to the Plaintiffs. Any remaining allegations are denied.

140. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 140 of the

Complaint.

141. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 141 of the

Complaint.

142. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 142 of the

Complaint.

16
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 16 of 20 PageID #: 94
143. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 143 of the

Complaint.

144. These Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 144 of the

Complaint.

145. These Defendants deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested in their

prayer for relief.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Defendants aver that the claims in the Complaint are barred by the statute of

limitations.

2. Defendants aver that the Complaint fails to identify to state a claim upon which

relief may be granted. In fact, Defendants aver that many of the verified allegations by the

Plaintiffs are patently false, and the claims are frivolous. Defendants have notified counsel of the

frivolous nature of the claims, and Defendants reserve the right to seek sanctions under Fed. R.

Civ. P. Rule 11 and 42 U.S.C. 1983 should Plaintiffs refuse to withdraw all frivolous claims

against these Defendants.

3. Defendant Smith relies upon the affirmative defense of Qualified Immunity for

those claims made against him in his individual capacity as a state actor. Defendants also asserts

the defense of sovereign immunity.

4. Defendant HCDE avers that municipal liability is not available under Monroe v.

Dept of Social Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978).

5. Defendants aver that the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act bars

Plaintiffs claims, to the extent asserted against these Defendants, for false arrest, false

imprisonment, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of

17
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 17 of 20 PageID #: 95
contract, fraud, defamation, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of

emotional distress, and selective prosecution. Tenn. Code Ann. 29-20-205(2), (5), and (6).

6. Defendants aver that all alleged acts and omissions against these Defendants arose

under the Defendants discretionary function. All related claims are barred by the Tennessee

Governmental Tort Liability Act. Tenn. Code Ann. 29-20-205(1).

7. Defendants expressly deny all alleged liability.

8. Defendants aver that punitive damages are not recoverable against them.

9. Defendants rely upon the doctrine of comparative fault against the Plaintiffs.

Should the facts demonstrate that the Plaintiffs, any or all of them, were at fault for their

damages, the Plaintiffs damages should be reduced in an amount proportional to their percentage

of fault. Should a factfinder conclude that Plaintiffs fault equaled or exceeded the fault of the

remaining defendants in this lawsuit, the Plaintiffs should be barred from recovery.

10. Defendants rely upon the doctrine of comparative fault against the co-Defendants.

Should the facts demonstrates that the co-Defendants, any or all of them, were at fault for the

Plaintiffs damages, the liability for each Defendants should be allocated in an amount

proportional to the percentage(s) of fault.

11. Defendants rely upon Tenn. Code Ann. 49-5-511(a)(3) as a defense to the claim

that Plaintiffs A. Montgomery and A. Nayadley were unlawfully suspended.

12. Defendants aver that Plaintiffs A. Montgomery and A. Nayadley had no right to

due process, waived their right to due process and failed to exhaust their administrative remedies.

13. Defendants aver that J. Jarvis had no liberty interest or due process rights related

to reassignment.

18
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 18 of 20 PageID #: 96
14. Defendants aver as a defense to Plaintiffs breach of contract claim that Plaintiffs

committed the first material breach.

15. Defendants aver that Plaintiffs defamation claims and malicious prosecution

claims are absolutely barred by the truth of the alleged statements.

16. Defendants aver that HCDE had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for its

employment actions. These employment decisions were based on reasonable factors other than

age, sex, and race.

17. Defendants aver that to the extent Plaintiffs have any damages their failure to

mitigate those damages preclude or limit their recovery.

18. Defendants reserve the right to raise additional defenses as the litigation continues

and additional facts are discovered.

Wherefore, now having fully answered Plaintiffs Complaint, these Defendants demand a

jury and request that the Complaint be dismissed and attorneys fees and other costs awarded to

them for defending this frivolous action.

Respectfully submitted,

ORTALE KELLEY LAW FIRM

/s/ W. Carl Spining


W. Carl Spining, BPR #016302
T. William A. Caldwell, BPR #27130
330 Commerce Street, Suite 110
P.O. Box 198985
Nashville, TN 37201-8985
(615) 256-9999
wcaldwell@ortalekelley.com
cspining@ortalekelley.com

19
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 19 of 20 PageID #: 97
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this the 21st day of July, 2017, a true and correct copy of the

foregoing document has been served via the courts electronic filing system as follows:

Curtis L. Bowe, III


707 Georgia Avenue, Suite 301
Chattanooga, TN 37402

/s/ W. Carl Spining


W. Carl Spining

20
Case 1:17-cv-00172-TRM-CHS Document 23 Filed 07/21/17 Page 20 of 20 PageID #: 98