More on Jennifer Hightower’s case against the City of Jasper

 

JASPER’S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES:

PLAINTIFF’S REPLY TO DEFENDANT’S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES:

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Any alleged adverse action taken by defendant The City of Jasper by Jennifer Hightower is the result of legitimate, non-discriminatory, non-retaliatory reason and would have been taken even in the absence of Hightower’s alleged exercise of protective activities.

D E N I E D

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Jennifer Hightower’s Am,ended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.  Hightower was an at-will employee whose employment was subject to termination at any time and for any reason, with or without cause.

D E N I E D

THIRD  AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The City of Jasper is entitled to a set-off of damages, including but not limited to, those amounts received by Jennifer Hightower from collateral sources, including any interim earnings and benefits Hightower may have received after she stopped working for the City of Jasper.

D E N I E D

 

 

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Jennifer Hightower failed to mitigate her damages by obtaining equivalent employment following her separation from the City of Jasper.  Without admitting that the City of Jasper suffered any damages, Hightower asserts that the City of Jasper is barred from recovery for any period in which she failed to mitigate damages.

D E N I E D

 

 

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Jennifer Hightower has failed to comply with all conditions precedent.

D E N I E D

 

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Jennifer Hightower’s damages, if any, were caused in whole or in part by independent, contributing and intervening causes, factors and conditions unrelated to any actions of the City of Jasper.

D E N I E D

EIGHT AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Any claims and damages of Plaintiff are barred or limited by the doctrine of after acquired evidence.

D E N I E D

NINTH  AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The City invokes all protections and defenses available to it under Florida law, including but not limited to§768.28, Fla. Stat.

D E N I E D

 

KARIN’S COMMENT:  AS TO THE CITY ADMITTING THAT MR. WILLIAMS VOLUNTARILY RESIGNED FROM HIS CITY MANAGER POSITION THE ATTORNEY SUSAN S. ERDELYI FROM MARKS GRAY ON BEHALF OF F.M.I.T. FAILS TO ADMIT THAT MR. WILLIAMS HAD NO CHOICE, THE STATE’S ATTORNEY’S OFFICE IN THE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT WOULD HAVE CHARGED WILLIAMS WITH AGGRAVATED ASSAULT HAD HE NOT RESIGNED AND THAT MAY BE PROVEN.

Leave a Reply