Defendant answers with general denial form

[justiceprevails]

What is the name of your state? California.

This is a real property matter. The matter is civil in Los Angeles Superior Court. I am the trustee of a trust. The trust owns an interest in real property with a tenant in common/co owner. I am suing the co owner/tenant in common for breaches of duties and in a separate complaint for partition of the real property.

In my original complaint, I filed 3 causes of action: breach of fiduciary duty, breach of implied contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The defendant answered yesterday with a general denial form, including affirmative defenses.

Question: is there a procedure I can file with the court whereby I can get more substantive answers?

In addition to the original complaint, I also filed a first amended complaint adding a fraud cause of action. Their general denial form doesn't specify which complaint they are referring to, i.e., the original or the first amended (which was filed prior to opposing party filing their answer/general denial). How should I proceed?

Also, I've filed a partition action against them in a separate complaint/another case number. I am the trustee of the trust which includes the property being disputed. One of their affirmative defenses in their general denial is that I don't have an interest in the matter. In this regard, should I consolidate the two cases? Or, do an amendment to the partition complaint?

 

[seniorjudge]

Question: is there a procedure I can file with the court whereby I can get more substantive answers?

A: Yes. Check the local and state civil procedure rules. There is something like a motion to make more definite (or whatever it is called out there).

 

[tranquility]

I believe general denials are allowed unless the complaint was verified. Was your complaint verified? It's too bad you already filed one amended complaint as you might have to ask to do it again.

I'm thinking you are doing this pro se. What is the fiduciary duty owed to the trust? Usually the trustee owes such a duty to the beneficiaries. How did the duty you are suing on come about?

What is the "implied" contract which of and concerns the land? Also, why do you allege there is a breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing with a co-tennant? Are you two in partnership in some way?

Pleading fraud requires very specific pleading. You need to look up how to do this as even an attorney sometimes make an error in the specific pleading requirements for fraud.

 

[Quaere]

I also filed a first amended complaint adding a fraud cause of action. Their general denial form doesn't specify which complaint they are referring to, i.e., the original or the first amended (which was filed prior to opposing party filing their answer/general denial).

Does their answer deny the count for fraud or not?

 

[justiceprevails]

Quaere: The opposing party merely answered with a general denial form. However, they included affirmative defenses and the affirmative defenses doesn't address the fraud cause of action.

 

[justiceprevails]

Tranquility:

I have filed 2 complaints: one for the breaches of duties and the other for partition of the land.

The partition is verified and they answered that one with a general denial form. Therefore, I intend to either file a motion for summary judgment or notice of default with regards to the partion (verified) complaint. Any thoughts? Is this the way to go?

With my complaint regarding the breaches of duties, I'm alleging tenant in common's owe each other a fiduciary duty and that the tenant in common breached that duty. I've listed about 11 ways in which the tenant in common has breached those duties. For instance, not apportioning rents, not including the tenant in common on the lease with tenants, ousting the tenants in possession, without consent from the other co-tenant/owner, etc...

I do allege that the tenant in common has breached the fiduciary duty to the trust, as opposed to the beneficiary (my mother), which I should probably amend. One of opposing parties affirmative defense, in their general denial, is that I'm not the real party in interest.

The implied K issue: is the opposing party/tenant in common, has orally represented to me, on many occassions, the desire to sell her interest and/or buy the other tenant in common interest, only to renege later.

Also, subsequent to filing my original complaint, the opposing party/tenant in common, delivered to me an offer to purchase the interest? So, maybe this offer can be characterized as a memorialization of the previous oral agreement, thus meeting the Statute of Frauds. Thus, a breach of an express contract.

One of their affirmative defenses is: barred by the Statute of Frauds.

 

[tranquility]

I'm pretty sure tennants in common do not owe each other a fiduciary duty. Most jurisdictions have a statute regarding the apportionment of rents from a third party or have case law for such. (Search for statute or case of Anne.) Not having you on the lease is not a breach, but if the lease leave you no right to possession, you may have suit for ejectment and the leasee may have rights against the lessor. The case of removing tennants without permission is a tort against the owner removing if done imporperly by the person removed and not by the co-owner. All those above things could change if there is a partnership agreement of some sort.

You do not have sufficient memorilzation to overcome the Statute of Frauds. The only part you could claim any damages on is not included in the written portion--besides it is an offer not a contract.

In general, you may have some cause for compensation--especially on the portion of rent issue. However, your legal theories seem without merit. If you don't get an attorney you may lose your right to sue for things which happened in the past if the case is dismissed. If the amount of money you are talking about is great, you must see an attorney. You're weaving a web of theories which are sure losers rather than keeping things simple and winning.

 

[justiceprevails]

Tranquility

I looked up and tenants in common duty owe a fiduciary duty to each other. I'll look up the Anne case you cited.

Orally, we had an offer and acceptance (by me the trustee) to the agreement for the defendant to buy out the plaintiff's/trust/beneficiaries portion/interest in the property. In fact, we've had several oral agreements and this has been going on for 2 years. I have oral and written statements by defendant.

Another breach is: her accounting page. Initially, she represented rent at one figure and then once I filed the complaint, she back dated the accounting page to change the rent amount, i.e., a "corrected" accounting page. Essentially, the defendant has been ripping off the plaintiff/trust/beneficiaries for 2 years/stalling about buying out our interest.

Filing a lawsuit was the only way I saw clear to apply pressure and leverage with a settlement. She refuses to buy out the interest at the fair market value.

Yes, I do intend to go to a lawyer. I've already gone to one and they want to settle because they said partition actions are expensive and timely (about 1 year).

However, I wanted to keep the legal pressure on as leverage in settlement.

So, essentially, at present, I'd like to know what to do with the fact that she answered my verified partition complaint, with a general denial form. Should I do a motion to strike her affirmative defenses, a notice of default or a motion for summary judgment?