Xavier Becerra Attorney General of California PETER D. HALLORAN Supervising Deputy Attorney General MEREDITH P. GAREY Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 253701 1300 I Street, Suite 125 PO. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 445-4782 Fax: (916) 324-5567 E-mail: Meredith.Garey@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO NIEGHAN FREDERICK, Plaintiff, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND and DOES 1 though 50, inclusive, Defendant. Case No. 34201100213234 ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAIVIAGES Action Filed: May 30, 2017 Answer to First Amended Verified Complaint for Damages (34-2017?00213234) m-h-mei?ICPursuant to Sections 431.10, et seq, of the California Code of Civil Procedure, Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (?Defendant?) ansivers the complaint of Plaintiff Meghan Frederick (?Plaintiff?) as follows: GENERAL DENIAL Defendant denies, both generally and specifically, each and every allegation of the complaint and denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief therein in accordance with the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30, subdivision Defendant further denies that Plaintiff has stated a cause. or causes of action for damages of any nature whatsoever by reason of the alleged acts or omissions of Defendant. Defendant further denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any legal andfor equitable relief whatsoever from Defendant. As for separate and distinct defenses to the complaint and each cause of action as alleged therein, Defendant alleges the following: AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Defendant pleads the following separate defenses. Defendant reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses that discovery indicates are proper. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State Cause of Action - As to Each CauSe The complaint, and each cause of action contained therein, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause or causes of action against Defendant. SECOND DEFENSE {Failure to Mitigate Damages - As to Each Cause of Acti?t) If Plaintiff suffered any compensable damages (an assumption Defendant deniesbut merely states here for purposes of this defense), Plaintiff has failed. to take all reasonable and appropriate steps to mitigate those damages. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Statutes of Limitation - As to Each Cause of Action) The ceases of action alleged in Plaintiff?s complaint, and each of them, are barred in whole 01? in part, by the applicable statutes or limitations, including, butnot limited to, Code of-Civil 2 Answer to First Amended Verified Complaint for Damages 4) KS. 00 Ch 43 U3 Procedure sections 3'37, 338, 339, 340, and/or 342, and California Government Code sections 911.2, 945.4, 945 .6, 12960 and 1296503). FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE - AS to Each Cause of Action Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies The complaint and each purported cause of action therein are barred because Plaintiff has failed to exhaust her administrative remedies including, but not limited to, any and all contractual grievanceprocedures provided by the collective bargaining agreement applicable to Plaintiff?s - employment, internal procedures and rules, andfor remedies required by state and federal law including, but not limited to, California Government Code section 12960, et seq. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Non-Retaliato Action 1 Any and all actions allegedly taken by Defendant were done, and would have been done in Le itimate N'on-Discriminator Reasons - As to Each Cause of any event, for legitimate, nondiscriminatory, and non~retaliatory reasons. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE [Waiver As to. Each Cause of Action! By reason of her conduct, Plaintiff has waived the right to assert the causes of action alleged in the complaint, or any cause of action whatsoever, against Defendant. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE {Estoggel - As to Each Cause of Action) By reason of her conduct, Plaintiff is estopped to assert the causes of action alleged in the complaint, or any cause of action whatsoever, against Defendant. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Lashes .- As to Each Cause of Action} Plaintiff unreasonably has delayed bringing her claims and, therefore, these claims are barred by the doctrine of laches. 3 Answer to First Amended Verified Complaint for Damages (34-2017?00213234) .24. 25 26 27 28 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE [Immunities - As to Each Cause of Action! Pla111t1ff?s claims are barred 1n whole or in part because all actions and conduct by Defendant and its agents or employees were justified and subject to governmental immunities, including but not limited to the immunities arising under the United States Constitution and federal law, immunities arising under the California Constitution and California law, immunities arising under California Civil Code section 47, and immunities arising under Government Code sections 810, et seq. including, but not limited to, sections 815, 815.2, 818, 818.2, 818.8, 820.2, 820.4, 820.6, 820.8, 821.2, 821.6, and 822.2. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE !Comparative Fault - As to-Each Cause of Action} If Plaintiff sustained any loss, injury, damages 0r detriment, (a proposition that is denied, but is merely stated for purposes of this defense) any such loss, injury, damage, or detriment was proximately caused by Plaintiff?s failure to exercise ordinary care. Plaintiff?s own acts and omissions proximately-caused andlor-contributed to any loss, injury, damage, or detriment austained by her, therefore, Plaintiff?s loss, injury, damage, or detriment, if any, should be reduced proportionally to'the percentage of Plaintiff own fault. ELEVENTH DEFENSE Avoidable Cause uences - As to Each Cause of Action Plaintiff?s claims are barred because Defend ant exercised reasonable. care to prevent and cerrect any behavior, and Plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventive or I corrective opportunities that would otherwise have prevented some or all of Plaintiffs alleged harm. I TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Third Party Liability - As to Each Citgse of Action) If Plaintiff has sustained any damages as a result of the conduct alleged in her complaint (a proposition that is denied, but is merely stated for purposes of this defense), then such damage as -.Was caused solely as a result of actions of third parties not under Defendant?s control. 4 Answer to First Amended Verified Complaint for Damages (34-21113-0021323 4) Us Jib- COO-THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE [Offset - As to Each Cause of Action) As a result of Plaintiff?s conduct, she has damaged Defendant in a manner, and in amounts, according to proof at trial. Accordingly, if Plaintiff has suffered any compensable damages (a proposition that is denied, but is merely stated for purposes of this affirmative defense), such damages must be offset by the damages suffered by Defendant as a prdximate result of Plaintiff? conduct I FOURTEENTH DEFENSE Miser] Motive - As to Each Cause of Action} Without admitting liability, Defendant alleges that if it is found that its actions were motivated in part by discriminatory andior retaliatory motives (aproposition which is denied but merely stated for purposes of this defense), these discriminatory and/or retaliatory motives were not a substantial motivating meter in any adverse employment action taken against Plaintiff. The legitimate and nondiscriminatory motives would have induced Defendant to make the same employment decisions. - FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff?s claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of uncleanhands because -.Plai11tiff?s alleged bases for seeking legal andfor equitable relief were the result of Plaintiff?s own actions and/or inaction. SIXTEENTH AFFIRNIATIVE DEFENSE (Variance to Alleggiiyans - As to Each Cause of Action) Plaintiff? 3 claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act are barred to the extent they nary from the allegations of the administrative charge ?led with the appropriate agency. 5 Answer to First Amended Verified Complaint for Damages (Bat-201100213234) SEVENTEENTH AFFIRNLATIVE DEFENSE {Injuries Arise from Pro-Existing Conditions or Injuries - As to Each Cause of Action) As a separate and distinct affirmative defense, Defendant pleads that Defendant is not liable for Plaintiff claimed emotional or physical injuries to the extent they arise out of pro-existing physical or mental conditions and/or other, non-employment injuries or life stressors. EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Privilege/Justi?cation - As to Each Cause of Action) Defendant?s conduct was ajust and proper exercise of managerial discretion, undertaken for fair and honest reasons, and comporting with good faith under the circumstances then existing. I NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Bar of Consent - As to Each Cause of Action) Plaintiff consented, either expressly or irnpliedly, to any acts or conduct as mav be shown on the part of Defendant. I TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Reduced Recoverv - As to Each Cause of Action) If Plaintiff is entitled to any recovery, such recovery must be reduced by the amount) Plaintiff received from collateral or alternative sources, including but not limited to that referred toin Government Code section 985, and Defendant shall be entitled to a set-off in the amounts of any prior, pending or ongoing recoveries for the same injuries or damages alleged in this action. I TWENTY-FIRST as?mrrva DEFENSE (After Acquired Evidence - As to Each Cause of?Actionl Plaintiff?s complaint is haired, in whole or in part, by the a?erkacquirccl evidence doctrine. TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE jReservation of All Defenses - As to Each Cause of Action! Because the complaint is couched in terms, Defendant cannot fully anticipate all. defenses that may be applicable to the Within action. Accordingly, the right to assert additional defenses, if and to the extent that such defenses are applicable, is hereby reserved. 6 . Answer to First Amended Verified Complaint for Damages (34?201100213234) WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for relief as follows: . 1. That the complaint be dismissed, with prejudice and in its entirety; 2. That Plaintiff take nothing by reason of this complaint and that judgment be entered against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendant; 3. That Defendant be awarded its attorneys* fees and costs incurred in defending this action; 4. That Defendant be granted such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Dated: August 25, 2017 3A2917107982 12795039doc Respectfully Submitted, XAVIER BECERRA Attorney-General of California . PETER D. HAIIDRAN Supervising Deputy Attorney General MEREDITH GAREY . Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 7 Answer to First Amended Verified Complaint for Damages (Bil-201100213234) DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY US. MAIL Case Name: Meghan Frederick v. CDCR No.: . 34?2017-00213234 I declare: I am employed in the Office of the Attorney General, which is the office of a member of the California State Bar, at which member?s direction this service is made. I am 18 years of age or older and not a party to this matter. I am familiar with the business practice at the Of?ce of the Attorney General for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. in accordance with that practice, correspondence placed in the internal mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General is deposited with the United States - Postal Service with postage thereon fully prepaid that same day in the ordinary course of business. - On August 25, 2017, I served the attached ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINTFOR DAMAGES by placing a true-copy thereof enclosed. in a sealed envelope in the internal mail collection system at the Office of the Attorney General rut-1300 I Street, Suite 125, PO. Box 944255, Sacramento, CA 94244?2550, addressed as follows: Lawrance A. Bohm unn Paulino Bohm Law Group, Inc. lunn Pauline 4600 Northgate Blvd, Suite .210 Sacramento, CA 95834 Beecher Law Robert L. Boucher, Esq. 2121 Nathmas Crossing Dr. I . Suite 200?239 Sacramento, CA 95834 ., - declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on August 25, 2017, at Sacrarn nto, California. A.Heath I Declarant Signature summons; 12?96613.docx