Case 2:11-cv-00995-RSL Document 48

Filed 12/27/11 Page 1 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LOANITA ADAMS, 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 13 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 18 19 1. 20 21 22 23 24

ANSWER TO FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT- 1 Cause No. C11-0995-RSL
K:\JWC\Federal Way adv Adams WCIA 11057\PLEADINGS\p 122711 Answer to 4th Am Complt.doc

THE HONORABLE ROBERT S. LASNIK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

No. C11-0995 RSL ANSWER TO FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT JURY DEMAND

CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, and its POLICE DEPARTMENT and its MUNICIPAL COURT COOPERATION,

COMES NOW Defendants (hereinafter Defendants), by and through their undersigned attorneys of record, and in answer to Plaintiffs Fourth Amend [sic] Discrimination Racial Profiling and Desperate Treatment and Impact complaint, admit, deny, and allege as follows: Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 1. It is unclear what this paragraph is intending to state or allege. It is therefore

2. denied. 3. denied.

It is unclear what this paragraph is intending to state or allege. It is therefore

KEATING, BUCKLIN & MCCORMACK, INC., P.S.

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 800 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4141 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-3175 PHONE: (206) 623-8861 FAX: (206) 223-9423

-1

Case 2:11-cv-00995-RSL Document 48

Filed 12/27/11 Page 2 of 5

1 4. 2 3 4 5 6 7 denied. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 10. 15 16 17 18 It is unclear why this Statement of Facts is included in the complaint. Because it is 19 20 21 22 23 24
ANSWER TO FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT- 2 Cause No. C11-0995-RSL
K:\JWC\Federal Way adv Adams WCIA 11057\PLEADINGS\p 122711 Answer to 4th Am Complt.doc

It is unclear what this paragraph is intending to state or allege. It is therefore

denied. 5. denied. 6. denied. 7. It is unclear what this paragraph is intending to state or allege. It is therefore It is unclear what this paragraph is intending to state or allege. It is therefore It is unclear what this paragraph is intending to state or allege. It is therefore

8. denied. 9.

It is unclear what this paragraph is intending to state or allege. It is therefore

It is unclear specifically what this paragraph is intended to state or allege

regarding jurisdiction and the basis therefore. Defendants admit this Court has primary jurisdiction over the federal claims made in Plaintiffs complaint, and supplemental jurisdiction over the associated state claims. paragraph 9 of the complaint is denied. Defendants deny that Plaintiff has suffered 300 thousand dollars in Any other allegation or assertion in

damages. 11. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 11. Statement of Facts

impractical to parse out each factual allegation from this section, Defendants deny the facts as alleged, and further deny Plaintiff is entitled to any relief against any Defendant for the facts alleged. 12. 13. Defendants deny the allegation of mental anguish and emotional distress. Defendants deny the allegation of abuse of process.

KEATING, BUCKLIN & MCCORMACK, INC., P.S.

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 800 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4141 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-3175 PHONE: (206) 623-8861 FAX: (206) 223-9423

-2

Case 2:11-cv-00995-RSL Document 48

Filed 12/27/11 Page 3 of 5

1 14. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 WHEREFORE, having fully answered the Plaintiffs Fourth Amended complaint, 22 23 24
ANSWER TO FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT- 3 Cause No. C11-0995-RSL
K:\JWC\Federal Way adv Adams WCIA 11057\PLEADINGS\p 122711 Answer to 4th Am Complt.doc

Defendants deny Plaintiff was falsely arrested, maliciously prosecuted, or

unlawfully detained. 15. 16. denied. 17. Defendants deny the allegation of negligent investigation. Conclusion Defendants deny the claims made in this section of Plaintiffs complaint. Affirmative Defenses BY WAY OF FURTHER ANSWER AND FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Plaintiffs complaint, Defendants allege that the arrest of the Plaintiff was lawful. BY WAY OF FURTHER ANSWER AND SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE to the Plaintiffs complaint, Defendants allege that the Defendants are immune from suit for the matters charged in Plaintiffs Complaint pursuant to the following: Statutory Immunity under RCW 10.99.070 and RCW 10.31.100(12). Qualified Immunity: Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 121 S.Ct. 2151, 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) Common Law Immunity: Guffey v. State, 103 Wn.2d 144, 690 P.2d 1163 (1984). Prosecutorial Immunity: Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 96 S.Ct. 984, 47 L.Ed.2d 128 (1976). Judicial Immunity: Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 98 S. Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978). Defendants deny Plaintiff has suffered any cognizable loss of consortium. It is unclear what this paragraph is intending to state or allege. It is therefore

Defendants request that the Plaintiffs complaint be dismissed with prejudice and that the Plaintiff take nothing by her complaint, and that the Defendants be allowed their actual

KEATING, BUCKLIN & MCCORMACK, INC., P.S.

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 800 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4141 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-3175 PHONE: (206) 623-8861 FAX: (206) 223-9423

-3

Case 2:11-cv-00995-RSL Document 48

Filed 12/27/11 Page 4 of 5

1 costs and attorneys fees herein and for such other and further relief as the Court shall deem 2 3 4 KEATING, BUCKLIN & McCORMACK, INC., P.S. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
ANSWER TO FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT- 4 Cause No. C11-0995-RSL
K:\JWC\Federal Way adv Adams WCIA 11057\PLEADINGS\p 122711 Answer to 4th Am Complt.doc

just and proper. DATED this 27th day of December, 2011.

/s/ Jeremy W. Culumber Jeremy W. Culumber, WSBA #35423 Of Attorneys for Defendants 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4141 Seattle, WA 98104-3175 Ph: (206) 623-8861 / Fax: (206) 223-9423 jculumber@kbmlawyers.com

KEATING, BUCKLIN & MCCORMACK, INC., P.S.

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 800 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4141 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-3175 PHONE: (206) 623-8861 FAX: (206) 223-9423

-4

Case 2:11-cv-00995-RSL Document 48

Filed 12/27/11 Page 5 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

DECLARATION OF SERVICE I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that on December, 2011, I electronically filed the foregoing Answer to Fourth Amended Complaint with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, and a copy of the same document will be served electronically and/or via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, from Seattle, Washington addressed as follows:

Via U.S. Mail, Postage Prepaid to: Loanita Adams General Delivery Seattle, WA 98101 Plaintiff Pro Se Via CM/ECF System to: Amy Jo Pearsall City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave. S Federal Way, WA 98003 amyjopearsall@cityoffederalway.com Dated this 27th day of December, 2011. Shelly Ossinger Shelly Ossinger, Legal Assistant Keating, Bucklin & McCormack, Inc., P.S. sossinger@kbmlawyers.com

ANSWER TO FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT- 5 Cause No. C11-0995-RSL

K:\JWC\Federal Way adv Adams WCIA 11057\PLEADINGS\p 122711 Answer to 4th Am Complt.doc

KEATING, BUCKLIN & MCCORMACK, INC., P.S.

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 800 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4141 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-3175 PHONE: (206) 623-8861 FAX: (206) 223-9423

-5