Contract analysis

Clause-by-clause risk read on any document of the firm. Pick a contract, or open any document from a matter.

Contract analysis / answer-and-affirmative-defenses.docx

answer-and-affirmative-defenses.docx

High · 3 Medium · 0 Standard · 1

I. INTRODUCTION

I. INTRODUCTION Defendant Cascade Retail Holdings Inc. ("Cascade" or "Defendant"), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 2200 Elliott Avenue West, Suite 1400, Seattle, Washington 98119, and publicly traded on the Nasdaq Stock Market under the ticker symbol CRHI, by and through its attorneys of record, Calderwood & Harkness LLP, hereby res

II. RESPONSES TO ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT High

⚑ Non-compete / exclusivity restraint

II. RESPONSES TO ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT A. Responses to Allegations Regarding the Parties (Paragraphs 1 Through 10) Paragraph 1. Cascade admits that Plaintiff Vantor Holdings Corp. is a California corporation with its principal place of business in Irvine, California. Cascade lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of Vantor's characterizations of the scope, nature, or extent

III. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES High

⚑ Non-compete / exclusivity restraint

III. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Without admitting any of the allegations of the Complaint and without assuming the burden of proof on any issue on which the burden of proof rests with Plaintiff under applicable law, Cascade hereby asserts the following affirmative defenses to each and every cause of action alleged in the Complaint: FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Lack of Knowledge of Exclusivity Provisions) Cascade did not have

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Defendant Cascade Retail Holdings Inc. respectfully prays for judgment as follows:

1. That Plaintiff Vantor Holdings Corp. take nothing by its Complaint;

1. That Plaintiff Vantor Holdings Corp. take nothing by its Complaint;

2. That each and every cause of action alleged in the Complaint be dismissed with prejudi

2. That each and every cause of action alleged in the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice and in its entirety;

3. That Cascade be awarded its costs of suit incurred herein pursuant to California Code

3. That Cascade be awarded its costs of suit incurred herein pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 1032;

4. That Cascade be awarded its reasonable attorneys' fees to the extent permitted by law, Standard

⚑ Commercial term

4. That Cascade be awarded its reasonable attorneys' fees to the extent permitted by law, contract, or statute; and

5. For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

5. For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

V. JURY DEMAND High

⚑ Penalty / liquidated damages

V. JURY DEMAND Defendant Cascade Retail Holdings Inc. hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable in this action pursuant to the California Constitution, Article I, Section 16, and California Code of Civil Procedure § 631. DATED: October 18, 2021 CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP By: ________ Douglas Carmichael (State Bar No. 187234) Francesca Morano (State Bar No. 215678) Yuki Nakamura (State Bar No. 298431) Car