A defendant is not confined to denials of the allegations of the complaint or petition, but is entitled to set out new matter in defense or as a basis for affirmative relief. Oral contracts can be just as valid and enforceable as written contracts.
The Second Defense of this form gives an example of pleading such a defense and is a generic example of an answer and affirmative defense that may be referred to when preparing such a pleading for your particular state.
In Arizona, an Answer by Defendant in a Civil Lawsuit Alleging the Affirmative Defense of the Cause of Action being Barred by the Appropriate Statute of Frauds is a legal response filed by the defendant in a civil lawsuit. This type of answer asserts that the plaintiff's claim is invalid or unenforceable due to the statute of frauds, which is a legal requirement that certain types of contracts be in writing to be enforceable. The Arizona Revised Statutes outlines the requirements for contracts that must adhere to the statute of frauds. These contracts typically involve agreements related to real estate, leases longer than one year, contracts for the sale of goods above a certain value, and promises to pay the debt of another person. When filing an Answer in Arizona, the defendant will typically include the following key elements: 1. Caption: The answer should include the proper court information, including the case number, names of the parties, and the court's name and address. 2. Introduction: The answer should begin with an introductory paragraph that identifies the defendant and states that they are answering the plaintiff's complaint. 3. Response and Admissions/Denials: The defendant must address each allegation made in the plaintiff's complaint. They may choose to either admit, deny, or state that they lack sufficient information to admit or deny each allegation. 4. Affirmative Defense: This is the critical part where the defendant raises the affirmative defense of the statute of frauds. They must clearly state that the plaintiff's cause of action is barred by the appropriate statute of frauds, providing the specific statute number and explaining how it applies to the case. 5. Prayer for Relief: The defendant concludes the Answer by requesting the court to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint or any other appropriate relief. It's important to note that while the statute of frauds may serve as a defense in some cases, there may be exceptions or ways in which the plaintiff can argue against it. Therefore, both parties should seek legal advice to assess the merits of such a defense thoroughly. Different types of Arizona Answers Alleging the Affirmative Defense of the Cause of Action being Barred by the Appropriate Statute of Frauds may include: 1. Answer and Affirmative Defense: Defendant asserting the statute of frauds as a defense against the plaintiff's claim. 2. Answer with Counterclaim: Defendant simultaneously raising their claims against the plaintiff while alleging the statute of frauds defense. 3. Answer and Cross claim: Defendant asserting their claim against a co-defendant while also raising the statute of frauds defense against the plaintiff. Note that the specific legal terminology and process may vary depending on the jurisdiction and the legal advisors involved. It is always recommended consulting with a licensed attorney for accurate legal guidance.In Arizona, an Answer by Defendant in a Civil Lawsuit Alleging the Affirmative Defense of the Cause of Action being Barred by the Appropriate Statute of Frauds is a legal response filed by the defendant in a civil lawsuit. This type of answer asserts that the plaintiff's claim is invalid or unenforceable due to the statute of frauds, which is a legal requirement that certain types of contracts be in writing to be enforceable. The Arizona Revised Statutes outlines the requirements for contracts that must adhere to the statute of frauds. These contracts typically involve agreements related to real estate, leases longer than one year, contracts for the sale of goods above a certain value, and promises to pay the debt of another person. When filing an Answer in Arizona, the defendant will typically include the following key elements: 1. Caption: The answer should include the proper court information, including the case number, names of the parties, and the court's name and address. 2. Introduction: The answer should begin with an introductory paragraph that identifies the defendant and states that they are answering the plaintiff's complaint. 3. Response and Admissions/Denials: The defendant must address each allegation made in the plaintiff's complaint. They may choose to either admit, deny, or state that they lack sufficient information to admit or deny each allegation. 4. Affirmative Defense: This is the critical part where the defendant raises the affirmative defense of the statute of frauds. They must clearly state that the plaintiff's cause of action is barred by the appropriate statute of frauds, providing the specific statute number and explaining how it applies to the case. 5. Prayer for Relief: The defendant concludes the Answer by requesting the court to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint or any other appropriate relief. It's important to note that while the statute of frauds may serve as a defense in some cases, there may be exceptions or ways in which the plaintiff can argue against it. Therefore, both parties should seek legal advice to assess the merits of such a defense thoroughly. Different types of Arizona Answers Alleging the Affirmative Defense of the Cause of Action being Barred by the Appropriate Statute of Frauds may include: 1. Answer and Affirmative Defense: Defendant asserting the statute of frauds as a defense against the plaintiff's claim. 2. Answer with Counterclaim: Defendant simultaneously raising their claims against the plaintiff while alleging the statute of frauds defense. 3. Answer and Cross claim: Defendant asserting their claim against a co-defendant while also raising the statute of frauds defense against the plaintiff. Note that the specific legal terminology and process may vary depending on the jurisdiction and the legal advisors involved. It is always recommended consulting with a licensed attorney for accurate legal guidance.
