Vanessa Adrian Vs Storey County Court Complaint

Case 3:16-cv-00425-MMD-WGC Document 7 Filed 09/08/16 Page 1 of 13
1 Katherine F. Parks, Esq. - State Bar No. 6227

Thorndal Armstrong Delk Balkenbush & Eisinger
2
6590 S. McCarran Blvd., Suite B
3 Reno, Nevada 89509
(775) 786-2882
4 kfp@thorndal.com
Attorneys for Defendants
5
STOREY COUNTY AND GERALD ANTINORO
6
7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10 VANESSA ADRIAN,
Plaintiff, CASE NO. 3:16-cv-00425-MMD-WGC
11
12 vs.
DEFENDANTS ANSWER TO
13 COUNTY OF STOREY, a political subdivision COMPLAINT
of the State of Nevada, and GERALD
14 ANTINORO, Sheriff of Storey County, and
15 DOES 1-10, inclusive,
16 Defendants.
17
18 COME NOW Defendants, COUNTY OF STOREY and GERALD ANTINORO, by and
19
through their attorneys of record, Thorndal Armstrong Delk Balkenbush & Eisinger, and in
20
answer to the Complaint, hereby admit, deny, and allege as follows:
21
22 FIRST DEFENSE
23 1. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint.

24 2. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint.
25
3. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information with which to form a
26
belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of the Complaint and, upon such
27
28 basis, deny said allegations.
-1-
4. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of the Complaint.

1
2 5. Defendants admit that Plaintiff is a female who served as a deputy sheriff for
3 Storey County.
4
5
6
7 8. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 of the Complaint.
8 9. Defendants admit that Plaintiff had field training with FTO Andres and deny the
9 remaining allegations in Paragraph 9.
10
11
11. In answer to Paragraph 11 of the Complaint, Defendants admit that Plaintiff
12
13 completed Phase 1 of FTO with FTO Francone and deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph
14 11.
15 12. Defendants admit that Plaintiff commenced Phase 2 training with FTO Andres
16
and deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 12.
17
18
19 14. Defendants admit that Timothy Guthrie told Plaintiff she needed remedial training
20 in Phase 2 and deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 14 on information and belief.
21
22
belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 15 of the Complaint and, upon
23
such basis, deny said allegations.
24
25 16. In answer to Paragraph 16 of the Complaint, Defendants admit that Plaintiff took
26 FMLA leave in October of 2011 and deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 16 on
27
information and belief.
28
-2-
17. Defendants admit that Plaintiff made a request to be removed from the Patrol
1
2 FTO program and deny the remaining allegation in Paragraph 17.
3 18. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information with which to form a
4
5
6
8 belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in Paragraph 19 of the Complaint and, upon
9 such basis, deny said allegations.
10
11
12
14 21. In answer to Paragraph 21 of the Complaint, Defendants are without sufficient

15 knowledge or information with which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained
16
in the first sentence of Paragraph 21 of the Complaint and, upon such basis, deny said
17
allegations. In response to the second sentence of Paragraph 21, Defendants admit that Chief
18
19 Deputy Fletcher recommended Plaintiffs termination from the program and deny the remaining
20 allegations in sentence number 2 of Paragraph 21. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in
21
Paragraph 21 of the Complaint.
22
23
24
27
28
-3-
1

4
25. Defendants admit that Plaintiff was scheduled to complete a driving evaluation
5
while employed by the Storey County Sheriffs Office and deny the remainder of Paragraph 25
6
7 on information and belief.
10
11
27. Defendants admit that the Plaintiff had a performance review in January of 2012
12
13 and deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 27 on information and belief.
14 28. Defendants deny the allegations contained in the third sentence of Paragraph 28 of
15 the Complaint and deny the remaining allegations on information and belief.
16
29. In answer to Paragraph 29 of the Complaint, Defendants admit the first and
17
second sentences of Paragraph 29. For the remaining allegations, Defendants are without
18
19 sufficient knowledge or information with which to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining
20 allegations contained in Paragraph 29 of the Complaint and, upon such basis, deny said
21
remaining allegations.
22
23
24
26 31. Defendants admit that Plaintiff sent an email to Tony Dosen on July 4, 2012,
27
regarding suspension of her driving privileges and deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph
28
31.
-4-
32. Defendants admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 32 of the Complaint.

1
2 33. Defendants admit that Plaintiff submitted a formal grievance to the Union and
3 deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 33 of the Complaint on information and belief.
4
34. In response to Paragraph 34 of the Plaintiffs Complaint, the Defendants admit the
5
allegations in the first sentence of Paragraph 34. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in
6
7 Paragraph 34.
8 35. In response to Paragraph 35 of the Complaint, Defendants are without sufficient

9 knowledge or information with which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained
10
in the first and second sentences in Paragraph 35 of the Complaint and, upon such basis, deny the
11
allegations in the first and second sentences of Paragraph 35. In response to the third sentence of
12
13 Paragraph 35, the Defendants deny the allegations. In response to the fourth and fifth sentences
14 of Paragraph 35, the Defendants admit the allegations.

15 36. Defendants admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 36 of the Complaint.
16
37. Defendants admit that an inmate escaped from the Storey County Detention
17
facility on October 1, 2012, and deny the remaining allegations in Paragraph 37 on information
18
19 and belief.

21
39. Defendants admit that Melanie Keener completed an Internal Affairs
22
Investigation of the inmates escape incident and deny the remaining allegations contained in
23
Paragraph 39 on information and belief.
24
27
28
-5-
1

4
42. In response to Paragraph 42 of the Complaint, Defendants are without sufficient
5
knowledge or information with which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained
6
7 in the first sentence of Paragraph 42 of the Complaint and, upon such basis, deny said allegations
8 in the first sentence. Defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 42.
10
11
12
16
17
18
21
22
23
24

27
///
28
-6-
SECOND DEFENSE
1
2 Plaintiffs Complaint on file herein fails to state a claim against these Defendants upon
3 which relief may be granted.

4
THIRD DEFENSE
5
At all times and places alleged in the Complaint, the negligence, misconduct, and fault of
6
7 Plaintiff exceeds that of these Defendants, if any, and Plaintiff is thereby barred from any
8 recovery against Defendants.

9 FOURTH DEFENSE
10
The occurrence referred to in Plaintiffs Complaint, and all damages, if any, arising
11
therefrom, were caused by the acts or omissions of a third person or persons over whom these
12
13 Defendants had no control.
14 FIFTH DEFENSE
15 It has been necessary for Defendants to employ the services of an attorney to defend this
16
action, and a reasonable sum should be allowed Defendants as and for attorneys fees, together
17
with their costs expended in this action.
18
19 SIXTH DEFENSE
20 Defendants allege that at all times and places alleged in the Complaint, Plaintiff did not
21
exercise ordinary care, caution or prudence in the premises to avoid the loss herein complained
22
of, and that same was directly and proximately contributed to and caused by the negligence,
23
misconduct and fault of the Plaintiff.
24
25 SEVENTH DEFENSE
26 Defendants allege that Plaintiff fails to name a party necessary for full and adequate relief
27
essential in this action.
28
-7-
EIGHTH DEFENSE
1
2 Defendants allege that Plaintiff has failed to timely plead this matter and has thereby
3 delayed the litigation and investigation of this claim to the prejudice of these Defendants and
4
accordingly this action should be dismissed.
5
NINTH DEFENSE
6
7 On information and belief, Defendants allege that Plaintiffs causes of action as set forth
8 in the Complaint are barred by the statute of limitations as contained in Chapter 11 of the Nevada
9 Revised Statutes and/or those applicable to Title VII and any other applicable federal law.
10
TENTH DEFENSE
11
Plaintiff is constrained from invoking equitable jurisdiction and an equitable remedy
12
13 because Plaintiff has not come before this Court with clean hands.
14 ELEVENTH DEFENSE
15 Upon information and belief, Plaintiff has failed to mitigate her damages.
16
TWELFTH DEFENSE
17
The damages, if any, incurred by Plaintiff are not attributable to any act, conduct, or
18
19 omission on the part of Defendants; Defendants deny that they were negligent in any manner or
20 in any degree with respect to the matters set forth in Plaintiffs Complaint.
21
THIRTEENTH DEFENSE
22
Plaintiff is estopped from asserting any cause of action whatever against Defendants.
23
24 FOURTEENTH DEFENSE
25 Plaintiff, by her acts and conduct, has waived and abandoned any and all claims as
26 alleged herein against Defendants.

27
///
28
-8-
FIFTEENTH DEFENSE
1
2 Defendants alleged actions or omissions were taken with due care in the execution of the
3 statutes and regulations, and, therefore, Defendants are statutorily immune from this action.
4
SIXTEENTH DEFENSE
5
Defendants alleged actions or omissions occurred in the exercise or performance of
6
7 discretionary functions and duties, and, therefore, Defendants are statutorily immune from this
8 action.
9 SEVENTEENTH DEFENSE
10
An award of punitive damages against Defendants would be violative of the Fifth
11
Amendment of the United States Constitution in that there is no assurance against multiple,
12
13 unrestrained punishment in the form of punitive damages. Such an award of punitive damages
14 would be violative of the double jeopardy provisions of the Nevada Constitution, Art. I, 8.
15 EIGHTEENTH DEFENSE
16
An award of punitive damages against Defendants would be violative of the due process
17
clause of the United States Constitution, the Fourteenth Amendment, 1, and violative of the
18
19 due process clause of the Nevada Constitution, Art. I, 8.
20 NINETEENTH DEFENSE
21
An award of punitive damages against Defendants would constitute an undue burden
22
upon interstate commerce and violate the interstate commerce clause of the United States
23
Constitution, Art. I, 8.
24
25 TWENTIETH DEFENSE
26 An award of punitive damages against Defendants would constitute an excessive fine
27
violative of the Nevada Constitution, Art. I, 7.
28
-9-
TWENTY-FIRST DEFENSE
1
2 An award of punitive damages against Defendants should be barred since Plaintiff cannot
3 establish that Defendants had an evil mind and conducted themselves in an aggravated and
4
outrageous manner.
5
TWENTY-SECOND DEFENSE
6
7 The burden of proof on punitive damages should be by clear and convincing evidence.
8 TWENTY-THIRD DEFENSE
9 To the extent Plaintiff is seeking damages under state law, the damages recoverable
10
against Defendants, if any, are limited by the provisions of NRS 41.035.
11
TWENTY-FOURTH DEFENSE
12
13 Plaintiffs medical care and/or treatment is not and was not necessary or related to the
14 incident that forms the basis of Plaintiffs Complaint on file herein.

15 TWENTY-FIFTH DEFENSE
16
Plaintiffs medical charges are not and were not reasonable or customary.
17
TWENTY-SIXTH DEFENSE
18
19 Punitive damages are not recoverable against the Defendants.
20 TWENTY-SEVENTH DEFENSE
21
Plaintiff is barred from recovering damages against Defendants by her failure to exhaust
22
any and all available state law remedies.
23
24 TWENTY-EIGHTH DEFENSE
25 Damages, if any, recoverably by Plaintiff are limited by the provisions of Title VII of the
26 1964 Civil Rights Act, as amended in 1991, 42 U.S.C. 2000 et seq.

27
///
28
- 10 -
TWENTY-NINTH DEFENSE
1
2 This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over all allegations in Plaintiffs complaint
3 which pre-date September 8, 2012.

4
THIRTIETH DEFENSE
5
Plaintiffs claims are barred in that Storey County, Nevada exercised reasonable care to
6
7 prevent and correct any alleged sexually harassing behavior and Plaintiff unreasonably filed to
8 take advantage of preventative or corrective opportunities provided by Storey County, Nevada or

9 to avoid harm otherwise.
10
THIRTY-FIRST DEFENSE
11
Plaintiff suffered no discrimination in her employment related to her gender.
12
13 THIRTY-SECOND DEFENSE
14 Liability cannot be imposed on Gerald Antinoro under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
15 of 1964.
16
THIRTY-THIRD DEFENSE
17
Plaintiffs federal claims are barred by virtue of the doctrine of qualified immunity.
18
19 THIRTY-FOURTH DEFENSE
20 Pursuant to FRCP 11, as amended, all possible affirmative defenses may not have been
21
alleged herein insofar as sufficient facts were not available after reasonable inquiry upon the
22
filing of Defendants answer, and therefore Defendants reserve the right to amend this answer to
23
allege additional affirmative defenses if subsequent investigation warrants.
24
25 ///
26 ///
27
///
28
- 11 -
WHEREFORE, Defendants pray:

1
2 1. That Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed with prejudice and that she take nothing
3 thereby;
4
2. That Defendants be awarded a reasonable attorney's fee and costs of suit; and
5
3. For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
6
7 DATED this 8th day of September, 2016.
8 THORNDAL ARMSTRONG
DELK BALKENBUSH & EISINGER
9
10 By: / s / Katherine F. Parks, Esq.
Katherine F. Parks, Esq.
11 State Bar No. 6227
6590 S. McCarran Blvd., Suite B
12 Reno, Nevada 89509
13 (775) 786-2882
kfp@thorndal.com
14 Attorneys for Defendants
STOREY COUNTY AND GERALD ANTINORO
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 12 -
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
1
2 Pursuant to FRCP 5(b), I certify that I am an employee of THORNDAL ARMSTRONG DELK
3 BALKENBUSH & EISINGER, and that on this date I caused the foregoing DEFENDANTS
4
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT to be served on all parties to this action by:
5
6 placing an original or true copy thereof in a sealed, postage prepaid, envelope in the
7
United States mail at Reno, Nevada.
8
United States District Court, District of Nevada CM/ ECF (Electronic Case Filing)
9
10 _____ personal delivery
11 ____ facsimile (fax)

12
_____ Federal Express/UPS or other overnight delivery
13
fully addressed as follows:
14
15 Justin M. Clouser, Esq.
Clouser Hempen Wasick Law Group, Ltd.
16 1512 Hwy 395 N. Suite 1
Gardnerville, Nevada 89410
17 Attorney for Plaintiff
18
DATED this 8th day of September, 2016.
19
/ s / Sam Baker
20 An employee of THORNDAL ARMSTRONG DELK
21 56BALKENBUSH & EISINGER
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 13 -

Vanessa Adrian Vs Storey County Court Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vanessa Adrian Vs Storey County Court Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:16-cv-00425-MMD-WGC Document 7 Filed 09/08/16 Page 1 of 13

1 Katherine F. Parks, Esq. - State Bar No. 6227

23 1. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint.

4. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of the Complaint.

14 21. In answer to Paragraph 21 of the Complaint, Defendants are without sufficient

3 such basis, deny said allegations.

32. Defendants admit the allegations contained in Paragraph 32 of the Complaint.

8 35. In response to Paragraph 35 of the Complaint, Defendants are without sufficient

14 of Paragraph 35, the Defendants admit the allegations.

20 38. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 38 of the Complaint.

3 such basis, deny said allegations.

26 49. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 49 of the Complaint.

3 which relief may be granted.

8 recovery against Defendants.

26 alleged herein against Defendants.

14 incident that forms the basis of Plaintiffs Complaint on file herein.

26 1964 Civil Rights Act, as amended in 1991, 42 U.S.C. 2000 et seq.

3 which pre-date September 8, 2012.

8 take advantage of preventative or corrective opportunities provided by Storey County, Nevada or

WHEREFORE, Defendants pray:

11 ____ facsimile (fax)

You might also like