{
David Gently, et
al.
v.
Kamala\ .
..
,
ris,
et
al.
Case No. 34-2013-80001667
Submitted by Defendants and Respondents Kamala
HmTis,
Stephen Lindley and John Chiang
Attachment 1
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The petition and complaint, and each cause
of
action alleged therein, fail to state facts sufficient
to constitute a cause
of
action against respondents.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
All acts or omissions by respondents or agents, employees, or representatives
of
respondents
were discretionary acts or omissions such that a writ
of
mandate may not issue to control the
exercise
of
such discretion.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
I
All acts taken by respondents or agents, employees, or representatives
of
respondents were
performed fairly, in good faith and for a lawful purpose, were reasonable and justified, and have
been consistent with all applicable legal and constitutional standards.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The requested relief is barred as a matter
of
law because granting such relief would result
in
an
unlawful order compelling respondents to act contrary to statutory duties.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The petition and complaint, and each cause
of
action, fails because respondents have fulfilled the
duties as provided by law.
I "
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Petitioners have failed to name indispensable parties to this action.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Petitioners lack standing to maintain this action.