Also known as: answers · answered · answering
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
3 senses
A responsive pleading filed by a defendant that addresses the allegations in the complaint by admitting or denying them and asserting affirmative defenses. It may also include counterclaims or crossclaims. The pleading must be served within the time limits prescribed by rule.
A responsive pleading filed by a defendant that addresses the allegations in the complaint by admitting or denying them and asserting affirmative defenses. It may also include counterclaims or crossclaims. The pleading must be served within the time limits prescribed by rule.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A response given to a question posed during testimony, discovery, or other legal inquiry. The term also encompasses being held to answer for criminal charges under constitutional protections that require grand jury indictment for serious offenses.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Accountability for the duty of another or of a decedent, as occurs in suretyship or executor agreements that fall within the statute of frauds.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A response given to a question posed during testimony, discovery, or other legal inquiry. The term also encompasses being held to answer for criminal charges under constitutional protections that require grand jury indictment for serious offenses.
Accountability for the duty of another or of a decedent, as occurs in suretyship or executor agreements that fall within the statute of frauds.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
After Argonaut Shipping filed its answer containing a counterclaim, the court issued an order directing Abigail Alvarez to reply. Alvarez served her reply twenty days later. Because the order did not specify a different period, the twenty-one-day window under the rule governed the timeliness of her filing.
Aaron Adams sued Astra Aerospace in state court asserting only state-law contract claims. Astra Aerospace removed the action, pointing to a federal defense it planned to raise in its answer. The federal court remanded the case because the well-pleaded complaint rule looks solely to the plaintiff's claims and not to defenses asserted in an answer.
Avalon Pharmaceuticals was served with a complaint alleging patent infringement. Within twenty-one days, the company filed and served its answer denying the material allegations and asserting several affirmative defenses. The answer constituted the required responsive pleading under the rules.
An answer must set forth affirmative defenses with sufficient particularity so that the plaintiff receives fair notice. Failure to plead an affirmative defense in the answer may result in waiver unless the defense is later added by amendment.
Supporting sources
The well-pleaded complaint rule prevents removal when the only federal issue appears in the defendant's answer. Federal question jurisdiction must arise from the plaintiff's complaint itself rather than from a defense or counterclaim.
Supporting sources
Federal prosecutors charged Angela Acosta with a felony arising from alleged securities violations. Because the offense carried the possibility of imprisonment exceeding one year, the government presented the matter to a grand jury before requiring Acosta to answer the charges in court. The indictment issued by the grand jury satisfied the constitutional prerequisite.
During trial, Adam Anderson's counsel sought to introduce testimony from Austin Abbott that the court had tentatively excluded. The judge directed counsel to make an offer of proof by questioning Abbott outside the jury's presence. The court then ruled on the record regarding the character of the proposed evidence.
The Fifth Amendment requires a grand jury indictment only for capital or otherwise infamous crimes. Misdemeanors and cases arising in the military during wartime are exempt from the grand jury requirement.
Supporting sources
A court may require an offer of proof in question-and-answer form when it needs a clear record of the excluded evidence and the objection. This format allows the appellate court to evaluate the ruling without speculation about the substance of the testimony.
Supporting sources
Antonio Alvarado, as executor of an estate, orally promised a creditor that the estate would satisfy the decedent's outstanding loan. When the creditor later sued to enforce the promise, the court held the agreement unenforceable because it constituted a contract of an executor to answer for a duty of the decedent and lacked a signed writing.
…whether they were then in the Secretary's office. Mr. Lincoln, Attorney General, having been summoned and called, objected to answering and requested the questions be put in writing and that he have time to determine whether he would answer. He had been acting as Secretary of State at the time and opined he was not bound to…