MARQUITTA L. PORTMAN, *
Appellant, *
-VS- * CASE NO S99A0440
S. LARK INGRAM, *
Appellee. *
Defendant's Answer
Now comes the Defendant, S. Lark Ingram, and responds to the Petition for Mandamus as follows:
FIRST DEFENSE
The petition fails to state a claim.
SECOND DEFENSE
Mandamus is not available to control judicial acts.
THIRD DEFENSE
Mandamus is not available to control the exercise of discretion.
FOURTH DEFENSE
The petition is now moot since the Defendant has recused herself as the judge in the underlying case.
FIFTH DEFENSE
Defendant responds to the individual paragraphs of the Petition for Mandamus as follows:
1.
Admitted.
2.
Admitted on information and belief.
3.
Paragraph 3 is a statement of legal theory of the Plaintiff, and as such is not an averment of fact that must be admitted or denied. In the event the court determines that paragraph 3 contains any averment of fact, it is denied.
4.
Admitted.
5.
Admitted.
6.
Admitted.
7.
Admitted on information and belief.
8.
Admitted.
9.
Admitted.
10.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 10 of the Petition.
11.
Defendant responds to the averments of paragraph 11 by stating that Exhibit H to the Petition appears to be a transcript of the June 24, 1998 hearing. As such it speaks for itself and Defendant denies the averments of that paragraph to the extent is inconsistent with Exhibit H.
12.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 12 of the Petition.
13.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 13 of the Petition except the time of the hearing that was held around the lunch hour.
14.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 14 of the Petition.
15.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 15 of the Petition.
16.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 16 of the Petition.
17.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 17 of the Petition.
18.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 18 of the Petition.
19.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 19 of the Petition.
20.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 20 of the Petition.
21.
The Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averments in paragraph 21 of the Petition.
22.
Paragraph 22 is a statement of legal theory of the Plaintiff, and as such is not an averment of fact that must be admitted or denied. In the event the court determines that paragraph 22 contains any averment of fact, it is denied.
23.
Paragraph 23 is a statement of legal theory of the Plaintiff, and as such is not an averment of fact that must be admitted or denied. In the event the court determines that paragraph 23 contains any averment of fact, it is denied.
24.
Paragraph 24 is a statement of legal theory of the Plaintiff, and as such is not an averment of fact that must be admitted or denied. In the event the court determines that paragraph 24 contains any averment of fact, it is denied.
25.
Paragraph 25 is a statement of legal theory of the Plaintiff, and as such is not an averment of fact that must be admitted or denied. In the event the court determines that paragraph 25 contains any averment of fact, it is denied.
26.
Paragraph 26 is denied.
27.
Paragraph 27 is a statement of legal theory of the Plaintiff, and as such is not an averment of fact that must be admitted or denied. In the event the court determines that paragraph 27 contains any averment of fact, it is denied.
28.
Any averment of the petition not specifically admitted herein is hereby denied.
WHEREFORE:
Defendant respectfully requests that:
The above-styled action be dismissed;
That she be dismissed as a Defendant; and
For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just.
Respectfully submitted,
THURBERT E. BAKER
Attorney General
JEFF MILSTEEN
Deputy Attorney General
(signature by Dennis R. Dunn)
DENNIS R. DUNN 234098
Deputy Attorney General
(signature by Kathryn L. Allen)
KATHRYN L. ALLEN 011050
Senior Assistant Attorney General
(includes Certificate of Service, August 28, 1998.)