2010 01 07 Yelm Beck Answer_Page_14
�ql
7
9
10
I I
12
13
14
15
16
17
v
19
20
21
22
-23 �-w
. 4{
r
2
EXPEDITE
_ Hearing is set:
Date/Time. 0
Calendar/Judge: McPhee
fN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASFDNGTON
THURSTON COUNTY
ANDR-EW J. SMITH and CYNTHIA M.
SMITH, husband and wife,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
THE CITY OF DOE, a municipal
corporation; GRANT BECK; STEVE
CHAMBERLAIN; FH I LLC, a Washington
corporation; DAN LEE, TRIANCE GROUR,
iNC, d/b/a TRIANCE HOMES, a Washington
corporation and a licensed Washington
construction contractor; STATE FARM FIRE
& CASUALTY CO., Bond No. 98GD85.")'07:
MAUREEN N IELAND; VANDORM
REALTY; a Washington corporation.
Defendants.
Na 09-2-028'79-3
DEFENDANT GRANT BECK"S
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR
BREACH OF CONTRACT.
MANDAMUS, BREACH OF DUTY
AND DAMAGES
COMES NOW the defendant Grant Beck (hereinafter "Beck ") and makes the fallowing
ms-ix r to l ntif sA Complaint,:
I. Parties.
1.1
Beck denies the allegations in paragraph 1.1 for lack of information.
DEFENDANT BECK'S ANSWER
TO COMPLAINT - 1
MORRIS TAR DAY, P.C.
P-0. Box 948, 223 Sea itch Lane .W.,
Tel. 360-830-0328 - Fax 360-850-1099
2
a
6
7
�Irjll
9
]0
I "?
13
14
15
16
17
v
19
20
I I14M.
22
? 13N
24
i5
F Beck- has no howled of any City � Igoe in Thurston County, Washi'ngton or
the State of Washington, and therefore denies the allegation in, paragraph 1.2 of the Complaint.
1.3 Beek resides in Thurston County, and denies the remainder of the allegation in
paragraph 1.3 of the Complaint.
1.4 Beck denies the allegations in paragraph 1.4 for lack of information.
1.5 Beck denies the allegations in paragraph 1 for lack of i
1.6 Beck denies the allegations in paragraph 1.6 for lack of information.4
1.7 Beck denies the a] legations in paragraph 1.7 for lack of information-,
H. Jurisdiction and Venue.
2.l Because Beck has no knowledge of any City of Doe in Thurston County,
Washington, the allegation in paragraph). I of the Complaint is denied.
III. Factual Allegations.
3.1 Beck denies that there is any, City of Doe in Thurston County, Washington.
Beck has no knowledge of any Hearing Examiner decision issued by the Ciiy of Doe. All
allegations in paragraph 3.1 of the Complaint are denied for lack of infom-iation.
3.2 Beck deru"es that there is . n F G'tv of Doe in Thurston Counrv. �� � L ���tt. 1�
Beck has no knowledge of any pity Council decision issued b-v the City of Doe. All allegations
in paragraph 3,2 of the Complaint are denied for lack of information.
3.3 Beek denies the allegations in paragraph 1.3 of the Complaint for lack of
in ri do .
3.4
information.
Beck denies the allegations in paragraph 3.4 of the Complaint fo- r lack of
'DEFENDANT BECK'S ANSWER
Tod COMPLAINT -
MORRIS & TARADAY., P. C.
P.O. Box 948, 7223 Seawitch Lane N,W,,
Seabee , WA 98380 -0948
Tel. 360. 830 -0328 - Fox 360-850-1099
3
4
s
rel
7
s
9
I ()
I 2
13
14
1�
16
17
V
19
?p
21
13
PZ" I
25
3.- Beck denies that there is any City of Doe in Thurston COUnty,. Washingqon.
Beck has no nowt e of any building pern-iftissued by the City of Doe. yell allegations irl
paragraph 3.5 of the Complaint are denied for lack of information.
3.6 Beck denies the allegations in paragraph 3.6 of the Complaint for lack of
information.
3.7 Beek denies the allegations in. paragraph 3.7 of the Complaint for lack of
infomiation.,
3.8 Beck denies that there is any City of Doe in Thurston County, Washington.
Beck has no knowledge of �.ny City of Doe occupancy permit communications. All allegations
in paragraph 3.8 of the Complaint are denied for lack of info rni ati on.
3.9 Beck denies that there is any City of Doe in Thurston County, Washington.
Beck has no knowledge of any activities relating to a pity of Doe occupancy permit or
amendment. All allegations in paragraph 3.9 of the Complaint are denied for lack of
infomiati n.
3.10 The allegations in paragraph 3.10 of the Complaint appear to relate to a meeting
held to discuss the building perm it issued by the City of Doe, attended bv the Mayor of the CAN,.
of Doc. Beck denies that there is any pity of Doe in Thurston County, Washington. Beckhas
no knowledge of anY facts relating to any meeting held on the subject of the City of Doe's
building permit and denies all of the allegations in paragraph 3.10 of the Complaint.
3.11 In paragraph 3.11 of the Complaint, plaintiffs describe an application they
submitted, apparently to the City of Doe. BILek denies that there is any City of Doe in Thurston
DEFENDANT BECK"S ANSWTR
TO CONIPLAWT -
MORRIS & TAIDY# P.C.
P.O. Box 948, 7223 Seawitch Lane N.W.,
Seab ekf WA 98380-0948
Tel. 360 - 830.0328 ! Fox 360 -85-0 -1099
3
4
5
Re
0
14
15
16
17
v
19
0? 0
?1
az
23
oz. A I
25
County, Washington. Beck has no knowledge of any application submitted to the City of Doe
and denies all of the allegations in paragraph 3.11 of the complaint for lack of information.
3.12 In paragraph 3.12 of the Complaint, plaintiffs refer to an application that they
submitted to the City of Doe. Beek denies that there is any City of Doe in Thurston Count-v,
Washington. Beck has no knowledge of any application submitted to the City of Doe and
denies all of the allegations in paragraph 3.12 of the Complaint for lack of information.
3.13 In paragraph 3.13 of the Complaint, plaintiffs refer to a staff report submitted by
Beck, apparently to the City Council of the City of Doe. Beck denies that there is any City of
Doe in Thurston County, Washington. Beck has no knowledge of any staff report submitted to
the Cite of Igoe and denies all of the allegations in paragraph 3.13 of the Complaint for lack of
infonilaflon.
3.14 The allegations in paragraph 3.1 4 of the Complaint relating to the actions of
plam*tiff are not averments for which answer is r i* recd. Without waiving objection n this
basis. Beck denies the same. As to the motion made bN,,, the City council of the City of Doe,
Beck has no knowledue al an�� City of Doe in Thurston County, Washington. Beck denies all
of the allegations in paragraph 3.14 of the Complaint for lack of infomiation,
3.15 The allegations in paragraph 3.15 relate to the City of Doi, and Beck knows of
no City of Igoe in Thurston County, Washiiiaton. Brent Dille is not the City. Attorney of the
City of Doe. Grant Beck is not the Community Development Director for the City of Doe.
Beck denies all of the allegations in paragraph 3.15 of the complaint for lack of information.
3.16 The allegations in paragraph 3.16 relate to the City of Doe. and Beck knows of
DEFENDANT [ Al T BECKS ANSWER
MORRIS & TARADA Yr P.C.
P.O. Box 948, 7223 Seawitch Lane N.W,r
Sea6eck, WA 98380-0948
Tel. 360. 830 -0328 - Fox 360-850-1099
a
6
7
s
9
10
I ?
1-t
15
16
17
[IN
19
zo
21
22 2
23
4
2 5
110 C-ity of Doe in Thurston County, Washington.
of the Complaint relating to the Cite of Doe.
Beck denies the allegations in paragraph 3.1 b
3.17 The allegations in paragraph 3.16 relate to the City of Doe, and Beck knows of
no City of Doe in Thurston County, Washington. Brent Dille is not the City Attorney for the
pity of Doe. Beck denies the allegations in paragraph 3.17 of the Complaint for lack of
information
3.1$ Beck denies the allerations in paragraph x.18 of the Complaint for lack of
information. Beck has no lcnoNNledge of any activities relating to the Cit),, of Doe.
3.19 Beck denies the first allegation in paragraph 3,19 of the Complaint for lack of
information. Beck denies that there is any City of Doe in Thurston County, Washington, and
has no knoMedge of the City of Doe's activities. Beck also asserts that the allegations in
paragraph 3.19 of the Complaint are not. averments for which answer is required, and without
waiving on this basis, Beck denies the same.
IV. Causes of Action.
4.1 The allegations in paragraph 4.I of the Complaint relate to co- defendants ether
than Beck. Beck denies the same for lack of information.
4.2 The a11e�ations in paragraph 4.2 of the Complaint relate to co- defendants other
than Beck. Beck denies the same for lack of information.
4.3 The allegations in paragraph 4.3 of the Complaint relate to co- defendants other
than Beck. Beck denies the sannc for lack of informatioll
DEFENDANT BECK'S ANSWER
TO COMPLAEN T -
MORRIS & TA RADA Y, P.C.
P.O. Brix 948, 7223 Seawitch Lane N.W.I.
Seabeck, WA 98 8aO948
Tel. 360-830-0328 . Fax 360 - 850-1099
1
2
a
5
6
7
s
01
10
I --)
L
14
15
16
1.7
is
19
CS
21
22
2.3
2 4
25
4.4 The allegations in paragraph 4.4 of the Complaint relate to the City of Doe,
Washington. Beck deices that there i� any City of Doe in Thurston C %krashington.
Beek denies all allegations in paragraph 4.4 for lacy of info ation.
4,5 The allegations in paragraph 4.5 of the Complaint relate to the pity of Doe,
Washington. Beck denies that there is any City of Doe in Thurston County, Washington. Beck
denies all allegations in paragraph 4.5 for lack of information.
4.6 Theallegations in paragraph 4.6 of the Complaint relate to Beck's alleged
activities as an employee of the City of Doe. Beck denies that there is any City of Doe in
Thurston County, WashingT-ton., or that he is em loved bv the City- of Doe. Beck denies all so
allegations in paragraph 4,6 for lack of information.
4.7 The allegations in paragraph 4.7 of the Complaint relate to Beck's alleged
activities as the Director of the City of Doe Community DeNeeloprnent Department. Beck
denies that there is any City f� Doe in Thurston County, ' � iii n r that i to f
the City of Doe. Beck denies al l alle�ations in paragraph 4.7 for lack of information.
V. Claims for Dam .
The allegations in paragraph 5.1 of the Complaint are not averments for which
ans wer is required. In addition, they do not relate to defendant Grant Beck. Without waiving
objection on this basis., Beck denies the same.
5.2 The allegations in paragraph 5.2 of the Complaint are not averments for�v-hich
answer is required. In addition, they do not relate to defendant Grant Beck. Without ���ai��ing
e iecfion this basis, Beck denies the same,
DEFENDANT B E 7 ANSWER
TO COMPLAINT - 6
MORRIS & TARADAY, P.C.
P.O. Box 948, 7223 Seawitch Lane ICJ .W. ,
Seebeck, WA 98380.0948
Tel. 360- 830 -0328 - Fax 360-850-1099
a
5
G
7
9
1-?
13
14
15
IV$
17
18
19
20
I 1
23
24
25
S.3 The allegations in paragraph 5.3 of the Complaint are not avernzents for which
wiswer is required. In addition, they do not relate to defendant Grant Beck. Without waiving
objection on this basis, Beck denies the same.
5.4 The allegations in paragraph 5.4 of the Complaint are not averments for which
answer is required. in addition, they do not relate to defendant Grant Beck, Without waiving
j ectio on this basis, Beck denies the same,
5.5 The allegations in paragraph 5.5 of the Complaint are not averments for whl*ch
answer is required. In addition, Beck denies that there is a City of Do e in Thurston County,
W ashington. or that he is an employee of the City of Doe. V�7ithout waivin� objection an this
basis. Beck denies the same.
6.1 The allegations in paragraph S.1 of the Complaint are not averments for which
answer is required. In addition, Beck denies that there is a City of Doe in Thurston County,
Washington, r that he i employee f the Ciqr f Doe. Without x iv i of l e t n this
1
basis, Beck denies the same.
BECK's RESPONSE TO PRAYER FOR RELIEF.
I . Beck denies that the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief set forth in paragraph I , p,
16 of the Complaint.
2. Beck denies tl�ai the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief set Earth in paragraph 2, p.
16 of the Complaint.
3. Beck denies that the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief set forth in paragraph 3, p.
16 of the Complaint.
DEFENDANT BECKS ANSWER
TO COMPLAINT 7
MORRIS & TARADA , P.C.,
P.O. . Box 9481 7223 Seawit h Lone N. W.,
ea beck, WA 98380 -0948
Tel. 360. 830 -0328 - Fax 360 -850-1 099
a
5 r
Y
7
H411-
0
III
I I
12
1:
14
15
16
17
19
f511]
21
22
23
24
-A2 5
4. Beck denies that the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief Set forth in paragraph 4, p.
16 of the Complaint,
5. Beck denies that the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief set forth in paragraph 5, p.
16 of the Complaint.
b. Beck denies that the plaintiffs are entitled to the relief set forth in paragraph G, p.
16 of the complaint.
BECK's AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Beck alleoes the following affirmative defenses to the Complaint:
A. The plaintiffs have ta 01
e s tate a claim upon which relief can be granted.
B. One or more of plaintiffs' claims are barred by laches, waiver and /or estoppel.
C. One or more of plaintiffs? claims are barred because of plaintiffs' failure to
exhaust admindstrative are / r , u i ci l remedies,
D. One or more of plaintiffs' claims are barred by the statute of limitations.
E. One or more f plaintiffs� M aims are not for adjudicati on.
F. If plaintiffs have suffered any alleged danages, they are attributable not to Beck,
but to Plaintiffs themselves, or thud parties over which Beek has no control.
G. Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate their alleged damages,,
H. The court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over one or more of the claims in the
Complaint,
I. Beck's actions are not the proximate cause of the plaintiffs' alleged damages.
J. There is no basis for plaintiffs' lawsuit against Grant Beck personally.
Plaindffs' l ,suit is frivolous.
DEFENDANT BECK'S ANSWER
TO COMPLAINT - 8
MORRIS & TA ADAY., P. C.
P- - Box 948, 7223 Seawitch Lane NWe
ecibec , WA 98380-0948
ToL 360 - 830.0328 - Fox 360 - 850 -1099
2
3
n
5
A0
7
�1161
01
10
I I
12
13
14
15
Irel
17
IN
ME
21
22
2-3)
24
zs
K. Defendant Beck is immune under the public duty doctrine and his actions were
within the scope of his employment.
BECK'S PRAYER FOR RELIEF.
Having answered the Plaintiffs" Complaint and stating its affirmative defenses, the
defendant Beck prays for relief as follows:
1. That Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed and that plaintiff take nothing thereby.
2. That the Court deteniiine that this action is frivolous, meritless, adNpanced
without reasonable cause under RCW 4.84.185 and CR 1.1, and require that the plaintiffs arld�`ur
plaintiffs' attorney pay Beck's reasonable expense, at�or�leys' fees and costs incurred in such
action,
3. That Grant Beck be awarded such further relief as the Court may deem just.
DATED this 6th day of January, 201011
DEFEND-ANT BECKS i WE
TO COMPLAMT -
\ORRIS & TARADAY, P.C.
am
arol A. Moms, WSBA #19241
Attome,, for the defendant Grant Beck
MORRIS TARA DAY, P. C.
F.C. Box 948, 7223 Soamtch [one N.` i.,
eabeck, WA 9838 &0948
Tel. 360-830-0328 • Fax 360 -850 -1099