The topic in this ex-zine article is a brief discussion on submitting responses to California civil litigation.
There are generally two types of civil lawsuits in California, not confirmed and verified. Most complaints are unconfirmed unless specific regulations or codes are provided separately, but claims can be confirmed with clarityiff options. The rules described here also apply to cross-claims.
If a complaint is confirmed, you need to confirm the answer. In addition, responses to complaints by government agencies must be confirmed. See paragraph 446 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Please note that this rule only applies to unlimited civil cases where complaint claims exceed $ 25,000.00.
The verified reply must acknowledge and refuse each paragraph of the complaint and the reviewer must read the answer and verify that everything contained therein is true within knowledge It must contain. The verification must be signed based on perjury penalty. Please note that if you do not submit the confirmed answer when you need it, you will respond to the strike claim because it will not be verified.
As mentioned earlier, defenders must acknowledge all paragraphs of confirmed complaints. Entrance or refusal is generally composed only of the following items.
A. Defendant denies the claim under paragraph 1.
B. The defendant admits the claim of paragraph 2.
C. Defendant has no information or belief that the assertion of paragraph 3 is true, so there is no obligation of confidentiality.
Confirmed complaints are deemed not to be specifically denied.
Complaints that have not been confirmed can be answered with general denials. With a general denial, we will refuse all of the claims of the lawsuit.
The answer must also include concrete positive defense for each case. A reply that contains only a positive defense of "fixed translation" is vulnerable to general enforcers because the answers can not state sufficient facts to state the defense of complaints.
We must state different positive defenses separately. You need to refer to the cause of the behavior they are related in "intellectually distinct manner". Code of Code Section 431.30 (g) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
If various positive defenses can not be stated separately and it is not possible to refer to the cause of the action involved, there is the possibility of becoming a special enforcer due to uncertainty reasons.
The California Court of Appeals has decided that the positive defense in response to the complaint must be adjudged in the same way with the same specificity as the cause of the action of the action. Since the conclusion is not admitted by supporters, the conclusion is invalid, so conclusive "formal" positive defense is inadequate.
Section 43010 of the Code of Civil Procedure states in the relevant part: "The party against whom the complaint or the objection has been raised is either one of the following depending on the rescuer or respondent specified in paragraph 430.30 (E) Pleas do not state sufficient facts to declare the cause of actions. (F) Pleas are unclear Contracts include written, oral, It is requested by action ". Therefore, respondents can use the same objections as those submitted to complaints in response to complaints.
The reply should include the necessary denials and positive defense to deny the serious claim of the complaint. That function is to put the case "on the matter" about all important matters appealed in litigation. We can not use answers for positive remedies. You need to file a dispute. See Paragraph 30 of Article 431 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The court is divided as in the civil procedure litigation in the lawsuit filed in the court's court that the court has submitted to the court, and it relies on it. "Article 458 of the Code of Civil Procedure
Participating parties must always cite certain laws and subdivisions as a lawsuit that can not specify both laws and subdivisions when pleading for legal restrictions. "
It is overlooked that we can not identify the subdivision of the law, but it is the only subdivision that "may be applicable to this case".
If you enjoy this article, please tell others about it.
Best regards,
Stan Berman
Please note that the author of this article, Stan Burman, is not a lawyer and can not provide specific legal advice. The author is not engaged in the provision of legal, financial, or other professional services and the information contained in this article does not declare legal advice.
These materials and information contained in this document were created by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. The sending of the information described in this article is not intended to create and receive business relationships between sender and recipient. Readers should not act on this information without asking for specialized advice.
EmoticonEmoticon