AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

STATE OF INDIANA

COUNTY OF MARION

 IN MARION COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

CASE NO: 49D12-2303-CC-011740
GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA,

 

Plaintiff,

v.

ELEXUS SMITH,

Defendant

  


AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendant, ELEXUS SMITH answers the Complaint filed by Plaintiff as follows:

  1. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the allegations in paragraph 1 of the Complaint. Defendant invites Plaintiff to strict proof thereof.
  2. Defendant admits the averments in paragraph 2 to the extent they identify Defendant as living within the jurisdiction of this Court. However, Defendant denies that this Court has personal jurisdiction over her, because of improper service of process.
  3. Defendant admits the contents of paragraph 3 of the Complaint.
  4. Defendant does not dispute the debt. The default is explained by her intention to consolidate the debt.
  5. Defendant admits the contents of paragraph 5 of the Complaint.
  6. Plaintiff admits the contents of paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
  7. Plaintiff admits the contents of paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
  8. Defendant has not settled the debt because she was going to consolidate. Cross River Bank, the consolidation company, advised Defendant to stop making payments towards the account.
  9. Defendant is not in breach of the contract. She does not dispute the debt. Instead, she seeks to consolidate the debt.
  10. Plaintiff has no right to demand payment of the debt because Defendant was advised to consolidate by the Cross River Bank.

WHEREFORE Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief requested by the Plaintiff.

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Lack of Personal Jurisdiction)

  1. In April 2023, Plaintiff sent the Summons for the instant case to a wrong address. Defendant never received the Summons.
  2. Defendant only knew that Plaintiff summoned her to court when she called the Court to get additional information on her other case.
  3. This Court therefore lacks personal jurisdiction over the Defendant and should dismiss the case.

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Failure to State a Claim)

  1. The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Failure to Mitigate)

  1. The claims made in the Complaint are barred, in whole or in part, because of a failure to mitigate damages, if such damages exist.

ADDITIONAL DEFENSES

  1. Defendant reserve the right to assert additional defenses based on information learned or obtained during discovery.

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment as follows:

  1. That Plaintiff takes nothing by way of their Complaint against Defendant;
  2. That the Complaint and each and every purported claim for relief therein, be dismissed with prejudice.
  3. That Defendant be awarded her costs of suit incurred herein, and
  4. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

 

Dated: __________

 

Respectfully submitted:

 

 

 

 

______________________________

ELEXUS SMITH

4048 Benicia Ct.

Indianapolis IN 46235

Pro se

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

I, ELEXUS SMITH, hereby certifies that on [ENTER DATE], copies of the foregoing Answer and Affirmative Defenses have been sent to the Plaintiff in the following address:

[ENTER ADDRESS]

 

 

______________________________

ELEXUS SMITH

4048 Benicia Ct.

Indianapolis IN 46235

Pro se

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )