Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

McFadden v. Meeker Housing Authority

United States District Court, D. Colorado

August 25, 2017

MEGAN MCFADDEN, LONNIE WHITE, and ANTONIO “A.J.” WHITE, Plaintiffs,
v.
MEEKER HOUSING AUTHORITY, a Property Management Company, MELINDA PARKER, MICHELLE BUCKLER, EDY GEORGE, and, STACIE KINCHER, Defendants.

          ORDER STRIKING AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

          WILLIAM J. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative Strike Affirmative Defenses. (ECF No. 104.) Specifically, Plaintiffs seek to strike affirmative defenses 1, 3-5, and 7-10 from Defendants' Amended Answer (ECF No. 102). For the reasons explained below, this motion is granted.

         I. LEGAL STANDARD

         Rule 12(f) permits a court to “strike from a pleading an insufficient defense.” “An affirmative defense is insufficient if, as a matter of law, the defense cannot succeed under any circumstance.” FDIC v. Isham, 782 F.Supp. 524, 530 (D. Colo. 1992).

         II. ANALYSIS

         A. Affirmative Defenses 1, 3, 7, and 10

         Defendants do not oppose Plaintiffs' request to strike their affirmative defenses 1, 3, 7, and 10. (ECF No. 104 at 2; ECF No. 104-1 at 1-2.) Those defenses are therefore stricken on this basis alone.

         B. Affirmative Defenses 4, 5, and 9

         Affirmative defenses 4, 5, and 9 may be addressed together. They read as follows:

4. Plaintiffs Lonnie and Antonio “A.J.” White failed to disclose A.J. White's income after he was no longer a full time student. As a result of their failure to disclose their complete income, Plaintiffs received benefits in whole or in part for which they were not eligible. Meeker Housing Authority is entitled to recoupment, reimbursement or set-off for benefits Lonnie and A.J. White wrongfully received.
5. Plaintiff, Megan McFadden intentionally or negligently made false representations to Defendant Meeker Housing Authority regarding her family's income and her marital status. Ms. McFadden made the representations in order to be eligible for Section 8 housing benefits. She also failed to disclose Levi McFadden's income in violation of the terms of her lease and the HUD requirements for eligibility for Section 8 housing benefits. She made these representations knowing the Meeker Housing Authority would rely on her representations in determining her eligibility for Section 8 housing benefits. As a result of her misrepresentations, Ms. McFadden received benefits in whole or in part for which she was not eligible. Meeker Housing Authority is entitled to recoupment, reimbursement or a set-off for benefits Ms. McFadden wrongfully received.
9. Defendants are entitled to a set-off from Plaintiffs' alleged damages[.]

(ECF No. 102 at 26-27.)

         1. Whether Defendants Should Have ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.