IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR

TH

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

xxx,
Plaintiff. CASE NO.: xxx

v.

yyy,
Defendants.
_______________________________________/

DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

AND COUNTERCLAIM

Defendants yyy (herein “Defendants”), by and through the undersigned attorney, file this
Answer and Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaim to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and would admit,
deny, and otherwise state as follows:
1. Items 1-6 are admitted for jurisdictional purposes only.
2. Items 7-12 are admitted for venue purposes only.
3. Items 13-16 are admitted, in connection to the Plaintiff and Defendant’s employment
history and the Plaintiff’s nature of employment
4. Items 17-18 are admitted.
5. Items 19-21 are denied.
6. Item 22 is admitted insofar as the Plaintiff sent a wire transfer to the Defendant y bank
account in the amount of One Hundred Forty-Four Thousand Four Hundred Seventy-Five
Dollars and 15.100 Cents ($144,475.15).
7. Item 23 is admitted to the extent that the subject property was acquired by virtue of the
Warrantee Deed executed by 3111 Grove, LLC in favor of the Defendants ESCAPE and
NOMADE.
8. Item 24 is admitted.
9. Items 25-32 are denied.
10. Item 33 denied.
COUNT I – BREACH OF ORAL CONTRACT
11. Items 34-37 are denied.
 12. Item 38 is admitted in so far that the property was acquired by the Defendants by
Warranty Deed.
13. Items 39-44 are denied.
14. Item 45 is admitted to the extent that the Plaintiff transferred the sum $144,475.15 to
Sukaya, LLC.
15. Item 46 is denied
COUNT II – FRAUD IN THE PERFORMANCE
16. Items 47-56 are denied.
COUNT III – FRAUD
17. Items 57-71 are denied.
COUNT IV – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FRAUD
18. Items 72-87 are denied.
COUNT V – UNJUST ENRICHMENT
19. Items 88-94 are denied.
COUNT VI – QUANTUM MERUIT
20. Items 95-100 are denied.
WHEREFORE, the Defendants demand judgment in their favor and against the Plaintiff, and
respectfully requests that the Court award to the Defendants costs, and award any other relief that
the Court deems just and proper.
DEFENDANT’S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
The Defendants assert the following affirmative defenses and expressly reserve the right
to revise, amend, and/or supplement these affirmative defenses with leave of Court or agreement
of counsel, as discovery continues, or the acts warrant:
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE – UNCLEAN HANDS
The Defendants assert the Doctrine of Unclean Hands which bars the Plaintiff’s claims
against the Defendants by virtue of the Plaintiff’s conducts and actions. Plaintiff’s wrongful
conduct precludes her from seeking relief and the claim should be dismissed. The Plaintiff is
utilizing this frivolous action to attempt to extort Defendant from his property and using this case
to thwart the Defendants’ property rights to the subject property. There was never any agreement
between the Plaintiff and the Defendants concerning the subject property being co-owned. In this
case, the Defendants will clearly be injured, through no fault of his own, should Plaintiff be
allowed to obtain damages against the Defendants.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE – STATUTE OF FRAUD
The extent to which allegations are based upon oral agreement, such oral agreement is
barred based upon Statute of Fraud. Such an oral contract would be unenforceable because it is
required to be in writing.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE – EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL
The Plaintiff, in wiring the money to y, did so voluntarily without any request form the
Defendants. The Defendants assert that the Plaintiff is estopped from pursuing the claims by
reason of the Plaintiff’s own actions and course of conduct – given that the Defendants never
entered into any agreement with the instant Plaintiff.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE – LACK OF CAUSE OF ACTION
The Plaintiff does not have a cause of action insofar as the yy are concerned since the
Plaintiff wired the funds to y. The latter Defendant has no interest over the subject property in
the current case.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE – FAILURE TO PROVE MATERIALITY
Assuming, arguendo, that the alleged representations were uttered, such representations
were not material to the contract because it did not induce the plaintiff to enter into the contract
based on the fact that it was the Plaintiff who is adamant into entering into an agreement with the
Defendants. The Defendants on the other hand did not agree nor enter to into such agreement
with the Plaintiff.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE – CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
The Plaintiff’s own action contributed to the loss or damages suffered. The Plaintiff has
continuously refused multiple offers to sign agreement which will allow her to recover the
money wired to y. The current case for damages should have been resolved if the Plaintiff settled
amicable and signed the agreement containing specified amounts.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE – LACK OF AGREEMENT TO COMMIT
FRAUD
The Plaintiff was not able to prove that there was indeed a clear agreement that the
Defendants agreed or conspired to commit fraud.
AS AND FOR THE COUNTERCLAIM AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF
 YYY (collectively, herein the “Defendants” and the “Counter-Plaintiff”), by their
attorney allege as follows:
PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
1. The Defendants/Counter-Plaimtiffs YYY are all limited liability company organized
under the laws of the State of Florida with the capacity to sue and be sued.
2. The Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs yyy are natural persons and are both residents of
Miami-Dade County, Florida, and are otherwise sui juris.
3. That the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant xxx is a natural person and a resident of Miami-
Dade County, Florida, and is otherwise sui juris.
4. That this Court has jurisdiction over this case being a counterclaim.
5. That the venue is proper in Miami-Dade County, Florida provided that the
Defendants are residents or holds business in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
COUNTERCLAIM FOR DAMAGES
6. The Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs re-allege and re-aver all the allegations contained
in paragraphs 1-5 above as fully set forth herein.
7. That the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant has filed a notice of lis pendens on the subject
property in connection to the current case.
8. By reason of the said notice of lis pendens, the defendants have suffered significant
financial harm and interference with their property rights. The clouding of title has
hindered the Defendants’ ability to conduct normal business operations or secure
financing against the affected property, resulting to quantifiable damages that the
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant should be held accountable for.
9. That the Plaintiff-Defendant should be held liable for damages, attorney’s fees, and
litigation fees
WHEREFORE, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs respectfully demand a judgment awarding
damages to the same against the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant xxx, including compensatory
damages, consequential damages, lost profits, pre- and post-judgment interest, litigation costs,
and all other relief this Honorable Court deems just, proper, and equitable under the given
circumstances.
COUNTERCLAIM FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
 10. That the Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff re-alleges and re-avers the allegation contained
in paragraphs 1-9 as if fully set forth herein.
11. In light of the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant’s actions and the uncertainty surrounding
the legal status of the property in question, the Defendants seek declaratory relief
from the court and to remove the cloud of doubt over it. The clarification and
declaration of the legal status of the subject property will facilitate the fair and
expeditious resolution of the dispute and prevent further misuse of the legal
procedures by the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant.
12. By reason of the notice of lis pendens filed by the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, it has
likewise clouded the title of the Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff over the subject
property.
13. Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs seek a declaration from this Honorable Court that
Katherine Rogers be declared as a stranger to the said property and declare further
that she has no rights or interests over the same, and that her lis pendens is invalid and
inappropriate.
WHEREFORE, the Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs pray that: 1.) the Plaintiff/Counter-
Defendant be required to file her Answer in the time prescribed by the Florida Rules on Civil
Procedure; 2.) that this Honorable Court remove the cloud of doubt over the property and declare
that the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant has no right or interests over the subject property; and 3.)
that this Honorable Court award the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff attorney’s fees, interests, costs,
and such further relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate.

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of this document was sent via the Florida Courts e-
Filing Portal to all counsel of record.

/s/ __________
Florida Bar No. ______
Attorney for Plaintiff
(LAW FIRM)
(Address)
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33309
Telephone: ---
 Fax: ---
Email: email