Sumner School Lawsuit Response

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNTY, KANSAS DIVISION 6

WARD-MEADE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION (N.I.A.), a corporation, Plaintiff, v.

SOUTHSIDE CHRISTIAN PALACE CHURCH W.R. PORTEE EVANGELISTIC WORLD OUTREACH, INC., a corporation, Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 2018-CV-000053

ANSWER COMES NOW Defendant Southside Christian Palace Church W.R. Portee Evangelistic World Outreach, Inc. by and through its counsel John H. Hutton and Adam C. Mauck of Henson, Hutton, Mudrick, Gragson & Vogelsberg, LLP, and for its answer to Plaintiff’s Petition states as follows: 1.

Any allegation of fact or conclusion of law not hereinafter specifically admitted is

hereby denied.

2.

Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations

contained in paragraph 1 of Plaintiff’s Petition, therefore, paragraph 1 is denied.

3.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

4.

Defendant admits the allegation contained in paragraph 3 of Plaintiff’s Petition

relating to the ownership of the Sumner Elementary School located at 330 SW Western Avenue, Topeka, Kansas; however, Defendant denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 3.

1

5.

Defendant is without sufficient information to verify the historical statement made

in paragraph 4 of Plaintiff’s Petition and notes that the said historical statement has no bearing on Plaintiff’s claim.

6.

Defendant is without sufficient information to verify the historical statement made

in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff’s Petition and notes that the said historical statement has no bearing on Plaintiff’s claim.

7.

Defendant is without sufficient information to verify the historical statement made

in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff’s Petition and notes that the said historical statement has no bearing on Plaintiff’s claim.

8.

Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations

contained in paragraph 7 of Plaintiff’s Petition, therefore paragraph 7 is denied.

9.

Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations

contained in paragraph 8 of Plaintiff’s Petition, therefore paragraph 8 is denied.

10.

Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations

contained in paragraph 9 of Plaintiff’s Petition, therefore paragraph 9 is denied.

11.

Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations

contained in paragraph 10 of Plaintiff’s Petition, therefore paragraph 10 is denied.

12.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 11 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

13.

Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations

contained in paragraph 12 of Plaintiff’s Petition, therefore paragraph 12 is denied.

14.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of Plaintiff’s Petition

to the extent that the items a, b, and c are referred to as “restrictions.”

15.

No response to Paragraph 14 is necessary.

16.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

17.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 16 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

2

18.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 17 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

19.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 18 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

20.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 19 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

21.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 20 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

22.

No response to paragraph 21 is necessary.

23.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

24.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 23 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

25.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 24 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

26.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 25 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

27.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 26 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

28.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 27 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

29.

No response to paragraph 28 is necessary.

30.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 29 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

31.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 30 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

32.

Defendant is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations

contained in paragraph 31 of Plaintiff’s Petition, therefore paragraph 31 is denied.

33.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 32 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

34.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 33 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

35.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 34 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

36.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 35 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

37.

No response to paragraph 36 is necessary.

38.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 37 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

39.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 38 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

40.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 39 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

41.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 40 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

3

42.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 41 of Plaintiff’s Petition.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1.

Defendant affirmatively states that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which

relief can be granted.

2.

Defendant affirmatively states that Plaintiff lacks standing to assert the claims

presented herein.

3.

Defendant affirmatively states that Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the applicable

statute of limitations.

4.

Defendant affirmatively states that Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of

5.

Defendant affirmatively states that Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of

6.

Defendant reserves the right to assert any and all additional affirmative defenses

laches.

waiver.

that may come to light through the course of full discovery.

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that Plaintiff take naught by its Petition, that judgment be entered in Defendant’s favor and against Plaintiff, for its costs and expenses herein, for its attorneys’ fee to the extent allowed under the law and for such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and equitable.

4

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ John H. Hutton John H. Hutton, #16573 Adam C. Mauck, #27638 HENSON, HUTTON, MUDRICK, GRAGSON & VOGELSBERG, L.L.P. 3649 SW Burlingame Rd., Ste. 200 Topeka, KS 66611-2155 (785) 232-2200 (785) 232-3344 (facsimile) jhutton@hhmglaw.com amauck@hhmglaw.com Attorney for Defendant

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a copy of the above and foregoing document was sent via electronic mail, on this 7th day of March, 2018, to: Paul D. Post paulpost@paulpost.com Attorney for the Plaintiff /s/ John H. Hutton John H. Hutton

5