Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 449 views

    Answer To Amended Counterclaim

    Uploaded by

    Kenan Farrell
    This document summarizes Noble Roman's, Inc.'s response to an amended counterclaim filed by AMI Stores Management, Inc. and related entities. Noble Roman's admits some allegations but denies many others, arguing that some claims were already decided by the court. Noble Roman's requests judgment in its favor and asserts defenses including res judicata, failure to mitigate damages, and unclean hands.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Answer To Amended Counterclaim

    Uploaded by

    Kenan Farrell
    449 views6 pages
    This document summarizes Noble Roman's, Inc.'s response to an amended counterclaim filed by AMI Stores Management, Inc. and related entities. Noble Roman's admits some allegations but denies many others, arguing that some claims were already decided by the court. Noble Roman's requests judgment in its favor and asserts defenses including res judicata, failure to mitigate damages, and unclean hands.

    Original Description:

    Answer to Amended Counterclaim

    Original Title

    Answer to Amended Counterclaim

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes Noble Roman's, Inc.'s response to an amended counterclaim filed by AMI Stores Management, Inc. and related entities. Noble Roman's admits some allegations but denies many others, arguing that some claims were already decided by the court. Noble Roman's requests judgment in its favor and asserts defenses including res judicata, failure to mitigate damages, and unclean hands.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    449 views6 pages

    Answer To Amended Counterclaim

    Uploaded by

    Kenan Farrell
    This document summarizes Noble Roman's, Inc.'s response to an amended counterclaim filed by AMI Stores Management, Inc. and related entities. Noble Roman's admits some allegations but denies many others, arguing that some claims were already decided by the court. Noble Roman's requests judgment in its favor and asserts defenses including res judicata, failure to mitigate damages, and unclean hands.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 6

    Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1369

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


    SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
    INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

    NOBLE ROMAN’S, INC., )


    )
    Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, )
    )
    vs. ) No. 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB
    )
    AMI STORES MANAGEMENT, INC. )
    AMI 57 LLC d/b/a AMI 70 FOOD MART, )
    AMI 63 LLC d/b/a AMI 63 FOOD MART, and )
    AMI 59, LLC )
    )
    Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs. )

    NOBLE ROMAN’S, INC.’S ANSWER TO AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM

    Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant/Third-Party Counterclaim Plaintiff, Noble Roman’s,

    Inc. (“NRI”), by counsel, HOLLINGSWORTH ROBERTS MEANS LLC, pursuant to Fed. R.

    Civ. P. 8(b) and 15(a)(3) for its response to the amended counterclaim filed by AMI Stores

    Management, Inc., AMI 57 LLC d/b/a AMI 70 Food Mart, and AMI 63 LLC d/b/a AMI 63 Food

    Mart (herein collectively referred to as the “AMI Parties”) on August 17, 2023 [Dkt. 68] (herein,

    the “Amended Counterclaim”), states and alleges as follows:

    ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM

    1. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    2. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    3. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    1
    Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 1370

    4. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    5. NRI admits that, amongst other reasons, it had the right to terminate the franchise

    agreements as alleged in paragraph 5 of the Amended Counterclaim.

    6. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

    the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the Amended Counterclaim speak for themselves and

    further denies these allegations as set forth in said paragraph 6.

    7. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

    the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of the Amended Counterclaim speak for themselves and

    further denies that the allegations set forth in said paragraph 7 accurately recite the written contract

    terms.

    8. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

    the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Amended Counterclaim speak for themselves and

    further denies that the allegations set forth in said paragraph 8 accurately recite the written contract

    terms.

    9. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

    the allegations contained in paragraph 9 of the Amended Counterclaim speak for themselves and

    further denies that the allegations set forth in said paragraph 9 accurately recite the written contract

    terms.

    10. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

    the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of the Amended Complaint does not contain a “Section

    SVII(a)(3)(n)” and therefore no answer to these allegations is required of NRI under the Federal

    Rules.

    2
    Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 1371

    11. NRI states that paragraph 11 of the Amended Complaint contains only a purported

    description of a letter designated with NRI’s successful motion for partial summary judgment filed

    in this case, as opposed to statements of factual allegations against NRI and thus no response is

    required under Federal Rule 8(b). To the extent a response is required, NRI admits the existence

    of the letter referenced in said paragraph 11, and that a true and accurate copy of the letter was

    designated to support NRI’s successful motion for partial summary judgment.

    12. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 12 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    13. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of the Amended Counterclaim

    and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to comprise a

    purported claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be

    barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

    14. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of the Amended Counterclaim

    and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to comprise a

    purported claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be

    barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

    15. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of the Amended Counterclaim

    and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to comprise a

    purported claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be

    barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

    16. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 16 of the Amended Counterclaim

    and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to comprise a

    3
    Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 1372

    purported claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be

    barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

    17. NRI denies the duplicative allegations contained in both paragraphs styled as “17”

    of the Amended Counterclaim.

    18. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 18 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    19. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 19 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    20. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 20 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    21. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 21 of the Amended Counterclaim

    and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to state a purported

    legal claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be barred

    under the doctrine of res judicata.

    22. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of the Amended

    Counterclaim.

    WHEREFORE, NRI requests that the AMI Parties take nothing by way of their averments

    and allegations made in their amended counterclaim pleading, for judgment in NRI’s favor, and

    all other relief just and proper in the premises, including attorneys’ fees and the costs of this action.

    ADDITIONAL DEFENSES

    NRI, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(c), hereby asserts the following defenses in response to

    the Amended Counterclaim filed by the AMI Parties:

    4
    Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 1373

    1. Any allegations or rhetorical paragraphs contained in the Amended Counterclaim

    which are not specifically admitted, denied, or responded to, are hereby denied.

    2. The claims advanced in the Amended Counterclaim are barred under the doctrine

    of res judicata.

    3. The AMI Parties failed to mitigate any damages purportedly incurred by way of the

    claims alleged in the Amended Counterclaim and are not entitled to recover any damages which

    they have unreasonably failed to mitigate or avoid.

    4. The AMI Parties are barred from recovery under the equitable doctrine of unclear

    hands.

    WHEREFORE, NRI requests that the AMI Parties take nothing by way of their averments

    and allegations made in their amended counterclaim pleading, for judgment in NRI’s favor, and

    all other relief just and proper in the premises, including attorneys’ fees and the costs of this action.

    Respectfully submitted,

    HOLLINGSWORTH ROBERTS MEANS LLC

    /s/ Jeffrey D. Roberts


    Jaime L. Meyer
    Atty No. 23686-29
    Jeffrey D. Roberts
    Atty No. 23723-53
    Ashley R. Roncevic
    Atty. No. 30333-18
    12801 E. New Market St.
    Carmel, IN 46032
    Office: (317) 569-2200
    Facsimile: (317) 569-2210
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    Attorneys for Noble Roman’s, Inc.

    5
    Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 1374

    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

    This is to certify that on August 31, 2023, the foregoing paper was filed electronically with

    the Clerk of the Court using the Court’s Electronic Case Filing (ECF) System. Notice of this filing

    will be sent to all parties by operation of the ECF system. The following parties may access this

    filing through the ECF system.

    Don Pinaud, Esq.


    All Florida Justice, LLC
    Law Office of Don Pinaud
    4530 St. John Ave., Ste. 15-202
    Jacksonville, FL 32210
    [email protected]

    /s/ Jeffrey D. Roberts


    Jeffrey D. Roberts

    HOLLINGSWORTH ROBERTS MEANS LLC


    12801 E. New Market Street
    Carmel, IN 46032
    Tel: 317-569-2200
    Fax: 317-569-2210

    You might also like