WESLIE W. JOHNSON VS. TORY M. PANKOPF

Complaint Information

BRANDIE DEVALL, Esq. (SBN 247308) 4508A Atlantic Ave. Suite 1220 FILED

Long Beach, California 90807 SAN MATEO COUNTY Telephone: (562) 989-7000 '

Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Complainant BRYANT K. CALLOWAY

SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

WESLIE JOHNSON, CASE NO.: CV518918 Plaintiff,

VS. ANSWER OF DEFENDANT AND CROSS- COMPLAINANT BRYANT K. CALLOWAY

TORY M. PANKOPF, TORY M PANKOPF, | TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

LTD., a professional corporation; BRYANT

K. CALLOWAY, and DOES 1 through 10,

inclusive, '

Defendants.

BRYANT K. CALLOWAY, Plaintiff, VS.

WESLIE JOHNSON, TORY M. PANKOPF, TORY M. PANKOPF, LTD., a professional corporation, and DOES through 25, inclusive,

Defendants.

Comes now, Defendant and Cross-complainant, BRYANT K. CALLOWAY (“CALLOWAY™), for himself and for no other party, answers the Complaint of Plaintiff and { Cross-defendant WESLIE JOHNSON (“JOHNSON™) and further pleads and alleges as follows: Defendant and Cross-complainant, CALLOWAY, generally and specifically denies each and every allegation of JOHNSON’S Complaint, and the whole thereof. CALLOWAY further denies

IWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (FAILURE TO PERFORM)

25. CALLOWAY alleges that to the extent CALLOWAY was obligated to perform any obligation or duty under the agreement between the parties, such performance was and is excused by virtue of the failure by JOHNSON to perform the conditions precedent

to CALLOWAY'S performance, if any, due under the terms of the agreement.

IWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (FRAUD)

26. The Complaint, and each and every purported cause of action or claim for relief therein, is barred because JOHNSON’S consent to the terms of the agreement were

procured by fraud.

IWENTY-SEVENTHAFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (FRUSTRATION)

27. The Complaint, and each and every purported cause of action or claim for relief therein, 1s barred because the purposes underlying the basis of the Complaint have been

frustrated and defeated.

IWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(FrRivoLous CLAIMS)

28. The Complaint, and each and every purported cause of action or claim for relief therein, is barred by reason of JOHNSON’S bad faith filing of frivolous claims contained

in the Complaint.

IWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (IMPLIED CONSENT)

29. The Complaint, and each and every purported cause of action or claim for relief therein, is barred because JOHNSON consented to and approved all of the acts and

omissions about which JOHNSON now complains.

THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (OFFSET)

30. The Complaint, and éach and every purported cause of action or claim for relief therein, is barred because, without conceding that an act or omission of Plaintiff caused damage to the Defendant or any other person in any respect, Plaintiff is entitled to offset and recoupment against any judgment that may be entered against Plaintiff all obligations of Defendant owing to Plaintiff, including but not limited to all offsets and recoupment due by reason of Defendant’s misrepresentation and concealment of facts, breach of duty, breach of contract, violation of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, violation of

federal and state statutory and common law, and other wrongful conduct and breaches.

THIRTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (STATUTE OF LIMITATION)

31. The Cross-complaint, and each and every purported cause of action or claim for relief therein, is barred because Defendant failed to timely file an action seeking relief for

the acts, omissions and/or conduct alleged in the complaint.

THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (ILLEGAL ACTS)

32. The Complaint, and each and every purported cause of action or claim for relief therein, is barred and this Complaint fails to state a cause of action because JOHNSON, by reason of his conduct and omissions, is guilty of illegal acts with respect to the

transactions alleged in the Complaint.