George Demetrius Karalis v. Kelly Douglas Carn, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Nevada denied plaintiff George Demetrius Karalis's motions to strike defendant Kelly Douglas Carn's affirmative defenses, jury trial demand, and answer. The court held that plaintiff was not prejudiced, the affirmative defenses satisfied the fair-notice standard, and the answer's untimeliness alone did not warrant striking it.

Holdings

1. The court denied the motion to strike because plaintiff failed to show prejudice, the merits of the affirmative defenses were more appropriately addressed through dispositive motions, and striking the filings would not otherwise be warranted.
2. Carn's affirmative defenses were sufficiently pleaded because Ninth Circuit fair-notice pleading requires only that a defense be described in general terms.
3. The court declined to strike the equitable affirmative defenses because plaintiff had not established undisputed facts demonstrating that Carn acted with fraudulent intent; the merits of the issue were better addressed through a dispositive motion.
4. The untimeliness of an Answer, standing alone, is not a sufficient basis for striking it, and the court therefore declined to strike Carn's Answer.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendant Carn's affirmative defenses and jury demand should be stricken for lack of prejudice, insufficient factual detail, or violation of the fair-notice pleading standard.
2. Whether Carn's Answer should be stricken because it was filed after the applicable deadline.

Disposition

denied