atkinson, andelson, loya, ruud & romo a...

VERIFIED ANSWER OF DEFENDANT TO PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED COMPLAINT FORDAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD & ROMOA Professional CorporationSteven D. Atkinson State Bar No. 59094Joanna L. Blake State Bar No. 19879917871 Park Plaza Drive, Suite 200Cerritos, California 90703-8597Telephone: (562) 653-3200 • (714) 826-5480Facsimile: (562) 653-3333

Attorneys for Defendant WESTERN UNIVERSITYOF HEALTH SCIENCES

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, EAST DISTRICT

SINCLAIR HUGH, an individual,

Plaintiff,

v.

WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTHSCIENCES, a California non-profit corporation,and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive,

Defendants.

CASE NO. KC041824 O

JUDGE: HONORABLE PETER J.MEEKA, DEPT. O

VERIFIED ANSWER OF DEFENDANTWESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTHSCIENCES TO PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIEDCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Defendant WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES (“Western University”),

for itself alone and no other party, files this Answer to the Verified Complaint filed by Plaintiff

SINCLAIR HUGH (“Hugh”).

Western University rejects as totally without factual basis the allegation that Hugh was

terminated because of the false and misleading statements he made to the IRS and the state

Attorney General’s office. Hugh was terminated because he took other actions that violated

University policies and ignored sound management practices. His employment was terminated

because his other actions (not his contact with government agencies) made him unfit to continue to

serve as head of human resource functions for Western University.

-2-VERIFIED ANSWER OF DEFENDANT TO PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR

DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

Following a thorough investigation, culminating in a review of relevant information by its

Board of Trustees, Western University determined that Hugh breached his management

responsibilities by: (a) failing to report alleged violations of law to his supervisor; (b) sharing

confidential and private information, including confidential salary information, with subordinate

employees and others both inside and outside the University; and (c) disseminating private and

confidential information, thus exposing Western University to potential liability from non-

governmental third parties. Western University determined that Hugh’s conduct constituted a

serious breach of confidentiality, a serious breach of Hugh’s management responsibilities, and

demonstrated a serious lack of judgment. For those reasons, and those reasons alone, Western

University terminated Hugh’s employment.

Western University answers Hugh’s Verified Complaint as follows:

1 . To the extent the allegations in paragraph 1 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint

constitute legal argument or legal conclusions, no answer is required. Western University admits

that Hugh was employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California within this judicial

district, pursuant to an “Agreement of Employment.” Western University lacks sufficient

information and belief with which to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in

paragraph 1, and on that basis, Western University denies each and every, all and singular,

generally and specifically, said allegations.

2. Western University admits the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of Hugh’s

Verified Complaint.

3. Western University lacks sufficient information and belief with which to admit or

deny the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint, and on that basis,

Western University denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the

allegations contained therein.






DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY

5. Western University repleads and incorporates herein by this reference, as though

fully set forth, each and every admission, denial and allegation made in this answer in response to

the paragraphs incorporated by reference into paragraph 5 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.

6. Western University admits that from July 1, 1999 until May 2, 2003, Hugh was

employed by Western University, pursuant to successive one-year written “Agreement[s] of

Employment,” as Western University’s Director of Human Resources. Western University

further admits that Hugh was responsible for managing and overseeing all human resources

functions and activities of Western University. Western University lacks sufficient information

and belief with which to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 6 of

Hugh’s Verified Complaint, and on that basis, Western University denies each and every, all and

singular, generally and specifically, said allegations.





8. Western University admits that, on or about April 11, 2003, Western University

placed Hugh on paid administrative leave pending an investigation into Hugh’s apparent breach of

management responsibilities. Save and except as expressly admitted herein, Western University

denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the allegations contained in

paragraph 8 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.

9. Western University admits Western University terminated Hugh on May 2, 2003

following a thorough investigation during which Western University found that (a) Hugh failed to

report alleged violations of law to his supervisor, (b) Hugh shared confidential and private

information regarding Western University and current and former employees of Western

University, including but not limited to confidential salary information, with Hugh’s subordinate


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

employees and others both inside and outside the University who were not governmental agencies,

and (c) Hugh’s behavior exposed Western University to potential liability from non-governmental

third parties due to the disclosure of private information, including but not limited to current and

former employee salary information; Western University considered Hugh’s conduct to be a

breach of confidentiality, a breach of Hugh’s management responsibilities, and demonstrative of a

serious lack of judgment. Save and except as expressly admitted herein, Western University denies

each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the allegations contained in paragraph 9

of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.

10. To the extent the allegations in paragraph 10 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint

constitute legal argument or legal conclusions, no answer is required. Western University lacks

sufficient information and belief with which to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in

paragraph 10, and on that basis, Western University denies each and every, all and singular,

generally and specifically, said allegations.


constitute legal argument or legal conclusions, no answer is required. Western University repleads

and incorporates herein by this reference, as though fully set forth, each and every admission,

denial and allegation made in response to Paragraphs 7 and 10. Western University admits

Western University terminated Hugh on May 2, 2003 following a thorough investigation during

which Western University found that (a) Hugh failed to report alleged violations of law to his

supervisor, (b) Hugh shared confidential and private information regarding Western University and

current and former employees of Western University, including but not limited to confidential

salary information, with Hugh’s subordinate employees and others both inside and outside the

University who were not governmental agencies, and (c) Hugh’s behavior exposed Western

University to potential liability from non-governmental third parties due to the disclosure of

private information, including but not limited to current and former employee salary information;

Western University considered Hugh’s conduct to be a breach of confidentiality, a breach of

Hugh’s management responsibilities, and demonstrative of a serious lack of judgment. Save and


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

except as expressly admitted herein, Western University denies each and every, all and singular,

generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 11.

12. Western University denies each and every, all and singular, generally and

specifically, the allegations contained in paragraph 12 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.

13 . Western University admits that Western University placed Hugh on paid

administrative leave pending an investigation into Hugh’s conduct, such as sharing his complaints

with subordinates and third parties, that Western University considered demonstrated a breach of

Hugh’s management responsibilities. Western University admits that Western University

terminated Hugh’s employment following a thorough investigation during which Western

University found that (a) Hugh failed to report alleged violations of law to his supervisor, (b)

Hugh shared confidential and private information regarding Western University and current and

former employees of Western University, including but not limited to confidential salary

information, with Hugh’s subordinate employees and others both inside and outside the





Hugh’s management responsibilities, and demonstrative of a serious lack of judgment. Western

University further admits that it filed a lawsuit against Hugh in this Court for libel, trade libel,

slander, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage and conspiracy. Save and


generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 13 of Hugh’s Verified

Complaint.



that no action was taken to alter the decision reflected in the termination letter to Hugh dated May

2, 2003. Save and except as expressly admitted herein, Western University denies each and every,

all and singular, generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 14.


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE §1102.5






the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 16.




denial and allegation made in response to Paragraphs 13 and 14. Western University denies each

and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in

paragraph 17.


fully set forth, each and every admission, denial and allegation made in response to Paragraph 11

and 12. Western University denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the

remaining allegations contained in paragraph 18 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.


fully set forth, each and every admission, denial and allegation made in response to Paragraphs 13








DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1



22 . Western University denies each and every, all and singular, generally and


THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS







denial and allegation made in response to Paragraphs 13 and 14. Western University denies each

and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in

paragraph 24.


constitute legal argument or legal conclusions, no answer is required. Western University denies

each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in

paragraph 25.




paragraph 26.


deny that Hugh has suffered and is suffering severe and extreme emotional distress, and on that

basis, Western University denies said allegation, generally and specifically. Western University


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the remaining allegations

contained in paragraph 27 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.




specifically, the contained in paragraph 29 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.




allegations contained in paragraph 30 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.









FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF EXPRESS CONTRACT OF CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT




35. Western University admits that Hugh and Western University entered into a series

of one-year written “Agreement[s] of Employment.” Western University further admits that

Hugh’s “Agreement of Employment” with Western University had a term that expired on June 30,

2003. Western University admits that the document annexed to the complaint and marked as


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

Exhibit C is a copy of the “Agreement of Employment” between Hugh and Western University

effective July 1, 2002. On information and belief, Western University denies that, pursuant to

Western University’s written policies, Hugh would receive ninety days of additional

compensation should Western University choose not to renew Hugh’s contract without notice.

Save and except as expressly admitted or denied herein or denied herein based on information and

belief, Western University denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the


36. Western University denies that Hugh at all times fulfilled his duties and conditions

under the “Agreement of Employment,” in that following a thorough investigation Western









Hugh’s management responsibilities, and demonstrative of a serious lack of judgment. Western

University lacks sufficient information and belief with which to admit or deny the remaining

allegations contained in paragraph 36 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint, and on that basis, Western

University denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, said allegations.

3 7 . Western University admits that Western University terminated Hugh’s

employment on or about May 2, 2003 following a thorough investigation during which Western







DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1






generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 37 of Hugh’s Verified

Complaint.



FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING







paragraph 40.

41. Western University denies that Hugh performed all the duties and conditions under

the “Agreement of Employment, ” in that following a thorough investigation Western University

found that (a) Hugh failed to report alleged violations of law to his supervisor, (b) Hugh shared

confidential and private information regarding Western University and current and former

employees of Western University, including but not limited to confidential salary information,

with Hugh’s subordinate employees and others both inside and outside the University who were

not governmental agencies, and (c) Hugh’s behavior exposed Western University to potential

liability from non-governmental third parties due to the disclosure of private information, including

but not limited to current and former employee salary information; Western University considered


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

Hugh’s conduct to be a breach of confidentiality, a breach of Hugh’s management responsibilities,

and demonstrative of a serious lack of judgment.





Western University terminated Hugh following a thorough investigation during which Western











generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 43.




paragraph 44.



/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

FAILURE TO PAY WAGES [LABOR CODE §§ 201, 202, 218, 218.5]





constitute legal argument or legal conclusions, no answer is required. On information and belief,


remaining allegations contained in paragraph 47.

48. Western University admits that Hugh was terminated on May 2, 2003 following a

thorough investigation during which Western University found that (a) Hugh failed to report

alleged violations of law to his supervisor, (b) Hugh shared confidential and private information

regarding Western University and current and former employees of Western University, including

but not limited to confidential salary information, with Hugh’s subordinate employees and others

both inside and outside the University who were not governmental agencies, and (c) Hugh’s

behavior exposed Western University to potential liability from non-governmental third parties

due to the disclosure of private information, including but not limited to current and former

employee salary information; Western University considered Hugh’s conduct to be a breach of

confidentiality, a breach of Hugh’s management responsibilities, and demonstrative of a serious

lack of judgment.



Western University admits that it did not pay Hugh through June 30 nor did Western University

give Hugh ninety days pay. Save and except as expressly admitted herein, Western University

denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically, the remaining allegations

contained in paragraph 49.


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1





51. On information and belief, Western University denies that any sums are due Hugh

under the terms of the “Agreement of Employment” and Western University’s written policy and

on that basis, Western University denies both generally and specifically the allegations contained

in paragraph 51 of Hugh’s Verified Complaint.





53. Western University admits that, pursuant to Labor Code §218.5, Hugh requests

that the Court award Hugh reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred by Hugh in this action.

Save and except as expressly admitted herein, Western University denies each and every, all and

singular, generally and specifically, the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 53 of Hugh’s

Verified Complaint.









/ / /

/ / /

/ / /


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

For its affirmative defenses, Western University alleges as follows:

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

56. As a first, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges that

the Verified Complaint, and each of its purported causes of action, fails to state facts sufficient to

constitute a cause of action against Western University.

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

57. As a second, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges

that the liability, if any, of Western University, with respect to the Verified Complaint herein,

which liability is expressly denied by Western University, arose wholly or in part by reason of the

acts, errors, omissions, and/or negligence of Hugh, or Hugh’s breach or breaches of obligations to

Western University, and, as such, Hugh is entitled to no relief whatsoever from Western

University.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

58. As a third, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges

that the injuries and damages, if any, sustained by Hugh as alleged in the Verified Complaint

herein, were proximately caused by the acts, errors, omissions, negligence and/or breaches of

obligation of individuals or entities other than Western University and, as such, Western

University is not responsible for any such injuries or damages.

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

59. As a fourth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges

that Western University has suffered damage by reason of Hugh’s conduct and, therefore, has the

right to offset any amount of money owed or due to Hugh by way of said damage.


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

60. As a fifth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges that

Hugh, by reason of his acts, omissions, representations, and courses of conduct which indicate a

waiver of any claim against Western University, is barred from any recovery herein by the doctrine

of waiver.

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

61. As a sixth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University is

informed and believes, and based on that information and belief alleges, that the damages, if any,

sustained by Hugh, were caused by the acts, omissions, or negligence of Hugh, and any damages

awarded to Hugh should be diminished in proportion to that amount attributed to Hugh.

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

62. As a seventh, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges

that Hugh, by reason of his acts, omissions, representations, and courses of conduct by which

Western University was led to rely to its detriment, is barred from any recovery herein by virtue

of the doctrine of estoppel.

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

63. As an eighth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges

that if any equitable relief is claimed to be owed to the Hugh as a result of the Verified Complaint

on file herein, it is barred as a result of Hugh’s own unclean hands.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

64. As a ninth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges

that if any equitable relief is claimed to be owed to the Hugh as a result of the Verified Complaint

on file herein, it is barred as a result of the doctrine of laches.


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

65. As a tenth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University is

informed and believes, and based on that information and belief alleges, that Hugh failed and has

failed to mitigate damages by failing to take such actions as are reasonably necessary to minimize

any loss which may have, or in the future may be, sustained.

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

66. As an eleventh, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University is

informed and believes, and based upon such information and belief alleges, that the relief prayed

for in the Verified Complaint is barred by the applicable statute of limitations, specifically,

California Civil Procedure Code §§ 336-349; California Labor Code § 203 and any other applicable

statutes of limitations and any other requirements relative to the giving of notice to the filing of

actions.

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

67. As a twelfth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University is

informed and believes, and based upon such information and belief alleges, that the damages, if any,

sustained by Hugh, were caused by acts, omissions, or negligence of third parties other than

Western University, and any damage awarded to Hugh should be diminished and proportioned to

that amount attributed to said third parties.

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

68. As a thirteenth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that the Verified Complaint, and each of its causes of action, are frivolous as to Western

University, and Western University is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees incurred in defending this

action pursuant to California Civil Procedure Code § 128.7, and other applicable laws.


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

69. As a fourteenth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that to the extent that Hugh’s Verified Complaint, or any cause of action therein, alleges

physical or emotional injury, any recovery by Hugh for these injuries is barred by the exclusivity

of remedy of the California Workers’ Compensation Act, Labor Code § 3200, et. seq.

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

70. As a fifteenth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University is

informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that any recovery on the Verified Complaint, or

any purported cause of action alleged therein, is barred because Western University’s disputed

conduct was privileged and/or justified.

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

71. As a sixteenth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges

that it is not liable for any of the alleged actions since Hugh consented to the actions set forth in

the Verified Complaint.

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

72. As a seventeenth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that Hugh has not pled conduct sufficient to justify the imposition of punitive damages

against Western University.

EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

73. As an eighteenth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that if the trier of fact should find that any agent of Western University engaged in any

allegedly unlawful conduct, then such conduct by the agent of Western University was done

outside the course and scope of such agent’s authority. Accordingly, Hugh is barred from

asserting any cause of action against Western University based on said allegedly unlawful conduct.


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

74. As a nineteenth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that as to each and every contract alleged in Hugh’s Verified Complaint and any purported

cause of action thereon, Hugh has failed to fulfill conditions precedent to the enforcement of any

contract.

TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

75. As a twentieth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that as to each and every contract alleged in Hugh’s Verified Complaint and any purported

cause of action thereon, Hugh committed a prior breach thereof, excusing any duty of further

performance by Western University.

TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

76. As a twenty-first, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that Hugh’s employment was at-will.

TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

77. As a twenty-second, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

is informed and believes, and on that information and belief alleges, that the terms and/or

conditions of any agreement or contract entered into between Hugh and Western University are

not specifically set forth and cannot be ascertained and thus, bar or diminish Hugh’s recovery.

TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

78. As a twenty-third, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University is

informed and believes, and on that information and belief alleges, that to the extent Hugh seeks

recovery herein based upon any alleged oral modification or agreement, said recovery is barred by

reason of the parole evidence rule.


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

79. As a twenty-fourth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

is informed and believes, and on that information and belief alleges, that Hugh’s Verified Complaint

is barred by the Statute of Frauds.

TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

80. As a twenty-fifth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University is

informed and believes, and on that information and belief alleges, that if it is determined that

Western University has failed to perform one or more of its obligations under any contract or

agreement described in the Verified Complaint, performance of each obligation was excused due to

impossibility or impracticability in each instance.

TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

81. As a twenty-sixth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that any adverse action that Hugh allegedly suffered was based on a legitimate business

reason.

TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

82. As a twenty-seventh, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Hugh’s claims are barred by the doctrine of after

acquired evidence.

TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

83. As a twenty-eighth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

is informed and believes that any remedy sought by Hugh must be reduced as a result of the

doctrine of after acquired evidence.


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

84. As a twenty-ninth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University is

informed and believes and thereon alleges that Western University did not willfully or intentionally

fail or refuse to pay any sum owing to Hugh.

THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

85. As a thirtieth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University alleges

that the claims alleged in the Verified Complaint against Western University are barred by the

doctrine of in pari delicto.

THIRTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

86. As a thirty-first, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that the actions of Hugh are arbitrary and capricious and violate implied-by-law duties of

good faith and fair dealing.

THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

87. As a thirty-second, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that as between Hugh and Western University, the equities do not preponderate in favor of

Hugh, and accordingly, Hugh is barred from any recovery herein.

THIRTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

88. As a thirty-third, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that it is not liable to any Hugh for any monetary damages alleged in the Verified

Complaint.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

THIRTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

89. As a thirty-fourth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that its conduct was not the cause in fact or the proximate cause of any of the damages or

potential damages alleged by Hugh.

THIRTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

90. As a thirty-fifth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that the allegations of the Verified Complaint allege allegations non-existent, not contracted

for, and outside of any agreement of the parties and, accordingly, Hugh is limited or barred to any

recovery herein.

THIRTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

91. As a thirty-sixth, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that at the time and places mentioned in Hugh’s Verified Complaint, Hugh did commit

willful misconduct in and about the matters and things alleged in Hugh’s Verified Complaint, which

said willful misconduct concurred in point of time with the alleged misconduct of Western

University, if any there may have been, and proximately caused and contributed to whatever

injury and/or damage Hugh may have sustained, if any.

THIRTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

92. As a thirty-seventh, separate and distinct affirmative defense, Western University

alleges that it presently has insufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as

to whether it may have additional, as yet unstated, affirmative defenses available. Western

University reserves herein the right to assert additional defenses in the event that discovery

indicates that they would be appropriate.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

WHEREFORE, Western University prays for judgment against Hugh as follows:

1. That Hugh take nothing by his Verified Complaint;

2. For reasonable attorneys’ fees;

3. For costs of suit incurred herein; and

4. For such other and further relief the Court deems just and proper.

DATED: June 13, 2003ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD & ROMO

By: Joanna L. BlakeAttorneys for DefendantWESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTHSCIENCES


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

VERIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

I have read the foregoing VERIFIED ANSWER OF DEFENDANT WESTERN

UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES TO PLAINTIFF’S VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR

DAMAGES and know its contents.

I am an officer of Western University of Health Sciences, a party to this action, and am

authorized to make this verification for and on its behalf, and I make this verification for that

reason.

[ ] I am informed and believe and on that ground allege that the matters stated in the

foregoing document are true.

[X] The matters stated in the foregoing document are true of my own knowledge except as

to those matters which are stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them

to be true.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on June ____, 2003 at _____________________, California.

G E O R G E C H A R N E Y , D OExecutive Vice President of Academic Affairs/C h i e f A c a d e m i c OfficerWestern University of Health Sciences


DAMAGES

AT

KIN

SO

N, A

ND

ELS

ON

, LO

YA

, RU

UD

& R

OM

OA

PR

OF

ES

SIO

NA

L C

OR

PO

RA

TIO

NA

TT

OR

NE

YS

AT

LA

W1

78

71

Pa

rk P

laza

Dri

ve,

Su

ite 2

00

Ce

rrito

s, C

alif

orn

ia 9

07

03

-85

97

Tel

epho

ne:

(562

) 65

3-32

00 •

(71

4) 8

26-5

480

Fa

csim

ile:

(56

2)

65

3-3

33

31

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

08227.014/419940v1

PROOF OF SERVICE1013A(3) CCP

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

I am employed in the county of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18and not a party of the within action; my business address is: 17871 Park Plaza Drive, Suite 200,Cerritos, California 90703.

On June 13, 2003, I served the foregoing document described as: VERIFIED ANSWER OFDEFENDANT WESTERN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES TO PLAINTIFF’SVERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES on all interested parties in this action:

by placing true copies thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as stated on theattached Mailing List:

by placing the original a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed asfollows:

Russell J. Thomas, Jr., Esq.THOMAS & ASSOCIATES2532 Dupont DriveIrvine, CA 92612

I deposited such envelope in the mail at , California.

The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid.

As follows: I am “readily familiar” with the firm’s practice of collection and processingcorrespondence for mailing. Under the practice it would be deposited with U.S. postal service onthat same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Cerritos, California in the ordinary course ofbusiness. I am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postalcancellation date or postage meter date is more than 1 day after date of deposit for mailing inaffidavit.

Executed on June 13, 2003, at Cerritos, California.

(BY PERSONAL SERVICE) I delivered such envelope by hand to the offices of theaddressee. Executed on at , California.

(STATE) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and of myown personal knowledge that the above is true and correct.

FLORENCE M. HANSEN ___________________________________

atkinson, andelson, loya, ruud & romo a...

Documents