 |
www.aligus.com was established November 7, 2002
to advocate against veterinary malpractice, incompetence & negligence
and
to educate the public about how state veterinary boards handle citizens'
complaints
|
|
|
AMENDED ANSWER OF NANCY DEAS AND EDNA DEAS TO KEVIN MONCE'S LAWSUIT
FROM MONCE'S LIBEL LAWSUIT
Unexpectedly to us, Kevin
Monce withdrew his lawsuit on October 22, 2007.
See also entire
lawsuit filed by Monce
CLAIM FOR LIBEL
22. The statements made by the Deas sisters and published on their
web site, aligus.com, libel Kevin Monce in that they impeach and harm
him in his profession.
23. The statements made by the Deas sisters and published on their
web site are libelous per se.
RELIEF REQUESTED
1. Hold that the statements made by the defendants and published
on their web site are libelous per se and harm the plaintiff
in his profession.
2. Order that defendants pay to plaintiff compensatory damages in
excess of $10,000.
3. Order that the defendants pay to plaintiff punitive damages.
4. Order defendants to cease publication of the libelous statements
on their web site in any other publication.
5. Order defendants to replace the current content of their web
site with statements approved by plaintiff and the court acknowledging
that the incorrectness of their claims and apologizing to plaintiff.
6. Order defendants to make reasonable efforts, approved by the
court, to contact and notify readers of the aligus.com web site
that the statements made on that site concerning Dr. Monce were
false.
|
View
the scanned document
NORTH CAROLINA
WAKE COUNTY
IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
05 CVS 4005
KEVIN A. MONCE, Plaintiff
vs.
NANCY G. DEAS and EDNA E. DEAS, Defendants
AMENDED ANSWER
Defendants Nancy G. Deas and Edna E. Deas, by and through their counsel of
record and pursuant to Rules 7 through 12 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil
Procedure, answer the Plaintiff's Complaint as follows:
JURISDICTION
1. Admitted.
VENUE
2. Admitted.
PARTIES
3. Defendants lack sufficient information and knowledge to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the Complaint;
therefore, those allegations are denied.
4. Admitted that Nancy G. Deas is a resident of Wake County and that she maintained
the web site www.aligus.com. Except as admitted, the allegations contained
in paragraph 4 of the Complaint are denied.
5. Admitted that Edna E. Deas is a resident of Wake County. Except as admitted,
the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the Complaint are denied
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
6. Defendants lack sufficient information and knowledge to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the Complaint;
therefore, those allegations are denied.
7. Defendants lack sufficient information and knowledge to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of the Complaint;
therefore, those allegations are denied.
8. Defendants lack sufficient information and knowledge to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Complaint;
therefore, those allegations are denied.
9. Defendants lack sufficient information and knowledge to form a belief as to
the truth or falsity of the allegations contained in paragraph 9 of the Complaint;
therefore, those allegations are denied.
10. Admitted that Nancy Deas created, maintained and wrote for the web site www.aligus.com.
Except as admitted, the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of the Complaint
are denied.
11. Admitted that in 2000 Nancy Deas and Edna Deas filed Complaint 00006-1-1 with
the Veterinary Medical Board against Dr. Dana Jones and the plaintiff alleging
a variety of acts of negligence and malpractice. Except as admitted, the
allegations contained in paragraph 11 of the Complaint are denied.
12. Admitted. A copy of the reprimand issued by the North Carolina Veterinary
Board to Dr. Dana Jones is attached as Exhibit 1.
13. Admitted that the Veterinary Medical Board issued a letter of reprimand against
Dr. Monce, that Dr. Monce contested the reprimand, and that the Veterinary Medical
Board initiated a contested case in the Office of Administrative Hearings. A
copy of the reprimand issued by the North Carolina Veterinary Board to plaintiff
is attached as Exhibit 2.
14. Admitted that a Consent Order was entered on April 2003. A copy of the
Consent Order, which speaks for itself, is attached as Exhibit 3. Except
as admitted, the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of the Complaint are denied.
15. Admitted that the language quoted in paragraph 15 of the Complaint about which
plaintiff complains was published on the web site www.aligus.com in November,
2002 and remained there continuously and without material alteration from the
date of its first publication until after the date of the plaintiff's complaint.
16. Admitted that the language quoted in paragraph 16 of the Complaint about which
plaintiff complains was published on the web site www.aligus.com between December
15, 2002 and February 14, 2003, and remained there continuously and without material
alteration from the date of its first publication until after the date of the
plaintiff's complaint.
17. Admitted that the document attached to plaintiff's Complaint as Exhibit A
appears to be a portion of the home page for the web site www.aligus.com. Except
as admitted, the allegations contained in paragraph 17 of the Complaint are denied.
18. Admitted that the defendants are of opinion that the plaintiff acted
negligently and incompetently, and thus committed malpractice, in connection with
the treatment of their dog. Except as admitted herein, paragraph 18 is denied.
19. Denied.
20. Denied.
21. Defendants repeat and incorporate by reference their responses to paragraphs
1 through 20 of the Complaint.
22. Denied.
23. Denied.
FIRST DEFENSE
Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
SECOND DEFENSE
Plaintiff's claims are barred because the information about the plaintiff published
on the web site www.aligus.com, when considered in its entirely and in proper
context, is not defamatory as to the plaintiff.
THIRD DEFENSE
The plaintiff cannot carry his burden of proving that the material concerning
him published on the web site www.aligus.com is false, because the factual statements
about him published on the web site are substantially accurate, and the statements
of opinion about him cannot be proven false as a matter of law.
FOURTH DEFENSE
Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrines of waiver and estoppel.
FIFTH DEFENSE
The material concerning the plaintiff published on the web site www.aligus.com
constitutes privileged communication to the public about a matter of public concern.
SIXTH DEFENSE
The material concerning the plaintiff published on the web site www.aligus.com
is protected under, and plaintiff's claims are barred by, the First and Fourteenth
Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, and Article I, Section 14
of the North Carolina Constitution (1971).
SEVENTH DEFENSE
The factual information about the plaintiff published on the web site www.aligus.com
is privileged because it constitutes fair and neutral reportage concerning matters
of general public interest and concern, and was published in good faith and without
actual malice.
EIGHTH DEFENSE
The plaintiff has instituted this action in bad faith and for improper purpose,
namely to utilize the judicial process as a means to harass the defendants and
to intimidate them into foregoing their exercise of the right of free speech accorded
them by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and by Article
I, §14 of the Constitution of North Carolina.
NINTH DEFENSE
To the extent any of the allegedly defamatory statements by these defendants were
made in communication to, or at hearings or meetings conducted by, the North Carolina
Veterinary Medical Board, the plaintiff's defamation claim as to those statements
is barred by an absolute privilege that these defendants had in connection in
making these statements.
TENTH DEFENSE
Certain statements complained of by the plaintiff are statements of opinion protected
by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States,
and Article 1, Section 14 of the North Carolina Constitution (1971), and thus
are not actionable against these defendants.
ELEVENTH DEFENSE
The plaintiff's claim for punitive damages against these defendants is barred
as a matter of law because plaintiff has not alleged, and in good faith cannot
allege, that the defendants acted with actual malice in publishing the information
about which the plaintiff complains.
TWELFTH DEFENSE
An award for punitive damages to the plaintiff would be unconstitutional because
it would constitute a denial of due process and a penalty in violation of the
Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
THIRTEENTH DEFENSE
The material concerning the plaintiff published on the web site www.aligus.com
was published in good faith and without malice, pursuant to a proper interest
or duty, was limited in scope to that interest or duty, was made on a proper occasion
was made to proper parties.
FOURTEENTH DEFENSE
The plaintiff's complaint is not well grounded in fact and is not warranted by
existing law or a good faith argument for the extension, modification o reversal
of existing law.
FIFTEENTH DEFENSE
The relief prayed for by the plaintiff includes prior restraint on the defendants'
speech, the granting of which would violate the defendants' rights as guaranteed
by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States
and by Article I, §14 of the Constitution of North Carolina.
WHEREFORE, having fully answered the plaintiff's complaint, defendants Nancy G.
Deas and Edna E. Deas respectfully pray unto the Court:
1. That the plaintiff's complaint be dismissed with prejudice, and that plaintiff
have and recover nothing against the defendants;
2. That the costs of this action, including any attorneys' fees, be taxed against
the Plaintiff;
3. For a trial by jury of all issues of fact so triable herein; and
4. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
This the 3rd day of October, 2005.
EVERETT, GASKINS, HANCOCK & STEVENS, LLP
By: Hugh Stevens
N.C. State Bar No. 4158
C. Amanda Martin
NC State Bar No. 21186
Attorneys for Defendants
127 West Hargett Street, Ste. 600
P.O. Box 911
Raleigh NC 27602
(919) 755 0025
(919) 755 0009 (facsimile)
VERIFICATION
NORTH CAROLINA
WAKE COUNTY
Nancy G. Deas, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that she is the defendant
in the foregoing Amended Answer, that she has read the Amended Answer, and that
the contents thereof are true to her own knowledge, except as to matters stated
on information and belief, and as to those matters she believes them to be true.
This the 3rd day of October, 2005.
Nancy G. Deas
Sworn to and subscribed before
me this the 3rd day of October, 2005
Kathryn C. Dunphy
Notary Public
My commission expires: 7-15-09.
VERIFICATION
NORTH CAROLINA
WAKE COUNTY
Edna E. Deas, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that she is the defendant
in the foregoing Amended Answer, that she has read the Amended Answer, and that
the contents thereof are true to her own knowledge, except as to matters stated
on information and belief, and as to those matters she believes them to be true.
This the 3rd day of October, 2005.
Edna E. Deas
Sworn to and subscribed before
me this the 3rd day of October, 2005
Kathryn C. Dunphy
Notary Public
My commission expires: 7-15-09.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that the foregoing Amended Answer was served
on counsel by hand delivering a copy of the same to the following:
Michael Crowell, Esq.
Tharrington Smith, LLP
209 Fayetteville Street Mall
Raleigh, NC 27602-1151
