Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Case 1:14-cv-00599-WJ-SMV
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 1 to the extent that they pertain to
him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 1 pertain to other Defendants, Mr. Corwin
lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and therefore denies
them.
2.
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 2 to the extent that they pertain to
him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 2 pertain to other Defendants, Mr. Corwin
lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and therefore denies
them.
3.
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 3 to the extent that they pertain to
him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 3 pertain to other Defendants, Mr. Corwin
lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and therefore denies
them.
PARTIES
4.
Mr. Corwin admits the allegations in paragraph 4 upon information and belief.
5.
Mr. Corwin admits the allegations in paragraph 5 upon information and belief.
6.
Mr. Corwin admits the allegations in paragraph 6 upon information and belief.
7.
Mr. Corwin admits the allegations in paragraph 7 upon information and belief.
8.
Mr. Corwin admits the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 8 upon
information and belief. With respect to the second sentence of paragraph 8, Mr. Corwin lacks
information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and therefore denies them.
9.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin admits the allegations in paragraph 10 upon information and belief.
11.
With respect to the allegations in paragraph 11, Mr. Corwin admits that he is a
resident of Bernalillo County, New Mexico, is a private investigator, and formerly was the lead
researcher and reporter at Independent Source PAC, which no longer is in operation. Mr.
Corwin denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 11.
12.
Mr. Corwin admits the allegations in paragraph 12 upon information and belief.
13.
Because Defendant Anissa Ford has been dismissed as a defendant to this action,
see Memorandum Opinion and Order (Doc. 98) at 19, a response to paragraph 13 is unnecessary.
2
15.
16.
Mr. Corwin admits the allegations in paragraph 16 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 16 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them
17.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
24.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
33.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
43.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
With respect to the allegations in paragraph 44, Mr. Corwin admits that the email
published in mid-June 2012 did not involve any of the named Plaintiffs. Mr. Corwin denies the
remaining allegations in paragraph 44.
45.
46.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
With respect to the allegations in paragraph 52, Mr. Corwin admits that he
received @susana2010.com emails from a confidential source. Mr. Corwin denies the remaining
allegations in paragraph 52.
6
53.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
With respect to the allegations in paragraph 54, Mr. Corwin admits that he
received @susana2010.com emails from a confidential source. Mr. Corwin denies the remaining
allegations in paragraph 54.
55.
56.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
61.
With respect to the allegations in paragraph 61, Mr. Corwin admits only that he
provided certain emails of Plaintiffs to the Attorney General of New Mexico, in response to a
demand by the Attorney General for the emails, in connection with the Attorney Generals
investigation of Mr. Corwins complaint of alleged misconduct on the part of the Governor and
7
her staff. Mr. Corwin expressly denies that the email messages of Plaintiffs were private and
confidential. Mr. Corwin further expressly denies that he provided email messages of Plaintiffs
to partisan bloggers, Democratic political operatives, reporters and the media, or to anyone
other than the Attorney General. Mr. Corwin denies any remaining allegations in paragraph 61.
62.
63.
With respect to paragraph 63, Mr. Corwin admits that the June 16, 2013
Albuquerque Journal article is quoted correctly. Mr. Corwin denies the remaining allegations in
paragraph 63.
64.
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 67 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 67 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them.
COUNT ONE: VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. 2511(1)(a)
THE FEDERAL WIRETAP ACT
(Against Defendant Estrada for Contemporaneous Interception)
68.
69.
Because Count One does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 69 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 69.
70.
Because Count One does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response a response to
paragraph 70 is unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the
allegations in paragraph 70.
71.
Because Count One does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, response to paragraph 71 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 71.
72.
Because Count One does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 72 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 72.
73.
Because Count One does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 73 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 73.
COUNT TWO: VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. 2511(1)(c) & (d)
THE FEDERAL WIRETAP ACT
(Against All Defendants for Disclosure and/or Use)
74.
75.
Because the statements in paragraph 75 are legal conclusions rather than factual
76.
Because the statements in paragraph 76 are legal conclusions rather than factual
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 79 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 79 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them.
80.
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 80 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 80 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them.
81.
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 81 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 81 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them.
82.
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 82 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 82 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
10
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them.
83.
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 83 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 83 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them.
84.
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 84 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 84 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them.
85.
Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in paragraph 85 to the extent that they pertain
to him. To the extent that the allegations in paragraph 85 pertain to other Defendants, Mr.
Corwin lacks information and knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations and
therefore denies them.
COUNT THREE: CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE 18 U.S.C. 2511
THE FEDERAL WIRETAP ACT
(Against All Defendants)
86.
Because Count Three has been dismissed as a defendant to this action, see Doc.
Because Count Three has been dismissed as a defendant to this action, see Doc.
Because Count Three has been dismissed as a defendant to this action, see Doc.
11
89.
Because Count Three has been dismissed as a defendant to this action, see Doc.
Because Count Three has been dismissed as a defendant to this action, see Doc.
Because Count Three has been dismissed as a defendant to this action, see Doc.
93.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 93 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 93.
94.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 94 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 94.
95.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 95 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 95.
96.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 96 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 96.
12
97.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 97 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 97.
98.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 98 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 98.
99.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 99 is
unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 99.
100.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 100
is unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 100.
101.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 101
is unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 101.
102.
Because Count Four does not pertain to Mr. Corwin, a response to paragraph 102
is unnecessary. To the extent that a response is necessary, Mr. Corwin denies the allegations in
paragraph 102.
103.
Mr. Corwin denies all allegations in the First Amended Complaint that are not
13
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1.
Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted against Mr.
Corwin.
2.
3.
Plaintiffs claims against Mr. Corwin are barred by the First Amendment.
4.
Any disclosure of Plaintiffs emails by Mr. Corwin occurred in the context of the
Attorney Generals investigation and was protected by the First Amendment right
to petition.
5.
6.
Mr. Corwins actions were not the proximate cause of any damages claimed by
Plaintiffs.
7.
Mr. Corwins actions were reasonable and he exercised ordinary care and
diligence at all times.
8.
Mr. Corwins actions were lawful because he did not know, and had no reason to
know, that Plaintiffs emails were illegally intercepted.
9.
Plaintiffs claims are barred by the equitable doctrines of estoppel, waiver, laches,
and unclean hands.
10.
11.
14
12.
13.
Mr. Corwin reserves the right to assert such additional affirmative defenses as
may be identified through discovery.
WHEREFORE, Mr. Corwin prays that Plaintiffs complaint be dismissed with prejudice
as to Mr. Corwin, for his costs and fees incurred in defending this action, and for such other
relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
ROTHSTEIN, DONATELLI, HUGHES,
DAHLSTROM, SCHOENBURG
& BIENVENU, LLP
Carolyn M. Cammie Nichols
Brendan K. Egan
500 4th Street NW, Suite 400
Albuquerque, NM 87102
(505) 243-1443
/s/ Kristina Martinez
Kristina Martinez
1215 Paseo de Peralta
Post Office Box 8180
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504-8180
(505) 988-8004
Attorneys for Defendant Michael Corwin
15
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on April 15, 2015, I filed this pleading electronically through
the CM/ECF system, which caused the following counsel to be served by electronic means, as
more fully reflected on the Notice of Electronic Filing:
Angelo J Artuso angelo.artuso@brytewerks.com
Gerald G. Dixon jdixon@dsblaw.com, abischoff@dsblaw.com
Zachary A Ives zach@ginlawfirm.com, assistant@ginlawfirm.com, office@ginlawfirm.com
Patrick Joseph Rogers patrogers@patrogerslaw.com, carolcasstevens@patrogerslaw.com,
jlassistant@patrogerslaw.com
Steven S. Scholl sscholl@dsblaw.com, bgonzales@dsblaw.com
Jerry Todd Wertheim todd@thejonesfirm.com, betsy@thejonesfirm.com,
sam@thejonesfirm.com, terri@thejonesfirm.com
Matthew L. Garcia matt@ginlawfirm.com, assistant@ginlawfirm.com, office@ginlawfirm.com
Mary (Molly) E Schmidt-Nowara molly@ginlawfirm.com, assistant@ginlawfirm.com,
office@ginlawfirm.com
James C. Wilkey jwilkey@dsblaw.com, vvallejos@dsblaw.com
Mark E. Braden MBraden@bakerlaw.com
Theodore J. Kobus, III tkobus@bakerlaw.com
Eric A. Packel epackel@bakerlaw.com
Bruce Wetherbee locationsmanager@gmail.com
Elizabeth M Martinez elizabeth.martinez@usdoj.gov
16