Laserfiche WebLink
9. Chavers deny the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of TKO's Complaint and <br />without waiving such denial admit they intend to pursue all claims for damages, to and include <br />injunctive action to further prevent damages to Chavers horses, crop damage, interference with <br />potential sale of the property, and other matters asserted in paragraph 22 of Plaintiffs' Complaint. <br />10. Chavers is without sufficient information or knowledge as to the allegations <br />contained in paragraph 23 of TKO's Complaint and therefore deny same. <br />11. Chavers deny the allegations contained in paragraph 24 of TKO's Complaint <br />without waiving such denial and specifically deny that "Plaintiffs'. wish to develop a ditch <br />stabilization and control plan ..." <br />12. Chavers deny the allegations contained-in.paragraph ZS of TKO's.Complaint as h <br />may pertain to Chavers. <br />13. Chavers deny the allegations contained in paragraph(s) 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and <br />32 of TKO's Complaint without waiving such denial admit that a cattle crossing was placed under <br />highway 85, and such cattle crossing was not for the purpose of allowing dischazge upon the land <br />of the Plaintiffs' to be discharged upon the land of Chavers. The "culvert" was developed for <br />purposes of a cattle crossing under Idighway 85 since the prior owners of TKO's land and <br />Chavers land were one and the same owner at the time of the placement of the cattle crossing. <br />14. Chavers deny the allegations contained in TKO's First, Second, Third, Fourth and <br />Fifth Claim for Relief. <br />AFFIItMATIirE DEFENSES <br />Plaintiffs' have failed to mitigate. <br />2. Plaintiffs' have failed to state a cause of action against these Defendants for which <br />relief can be granted. <br />3. Phunti8's are estopped from asserting such claims, and Chavers asserts the defense <br />of waiver and estoppel. <br />4. Plaintiffs' have violated the "Clean Hands Doctrine", and therefore should be <br />denied any equitable relief. <br />5. The alleged seepage ditches as asserted by these Plaintiffs' had been abandoned <br />and therefore the Statute of Limitations have run relative to any claims with respect to such <br />ditches. <br />3 <br />