You are on page 1of 7

FILED IN MY OFFICE

DISTRICT COURT CLERK


8/14/2015 1:17:11 PM
James A. Noel
Gena Lopez

STATE OF NEW MEXICO


COUNTY OF BERNALILLO
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT

MUNAH GREEN,
Plaintiff,
No. D-202-CV-2015-05680

v.

CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE,
Defendant.

DEFENDANT CITY OF ALBUQUERQUES ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF MUNAH


GREENS COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE INSPECTION OF PUBLIC
RECORDS ACT
COMES NOW, the City of Albuquerque (City), by and through its counsel of record
Assistant City Attorney Kevin Morrow, and hereby answers Plaintiffs Complaint as follows:
PARTIES
1.

In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint, the


Defendant is without knowledge of the veracity of the allegation.

2.

The Defendant denies the allegations in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint, to the


extent that the allegations call for a legal conclusion. The City states further that
it is a municipal corporation formed under the laws of the State of New Mexico .
JURISDICTION

3.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the Complaint.

4.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Complaint.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
5.

In response to the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the Complaint, the


Defendant admits that the Plaintiffs son, Jaquise Lewis, died on March 22, 2015,
but is without sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the remainder of the
allegations; therefore, the same are denied.

6.

The Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 6, but states further
that the written request was electronically submitted and received at
approximately 4:52 p.m. on Friday April 10, 2015. Additionally, the Defendant
states that the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) records custodians
office is housed within the APD Records division, which responds to requests to
inspect or obtain copies of APD related documents made pursuant to the
Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA). The operating hours of the APD
Records IPRA division are 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.

7.

The Defendant admits that the Plaintiff submitted a request pursuant to IPRA, but
denies the remainder of the allegations contained in paragraph 7. The City states
further that the records sought pertained to an ongoing police investigation
containing many witnesses and potential criminal defendants; therefore, the
records are exempt from release under IPRA. NMSA 1978, 14-2-1(A)(4) states
as follows:
law enforcement records that reveal confidential sources, methods,
information or individuals accused but not charged with a crime. Law
enforcement records include evidence in any form received or compiled in
connection with any criminal investigation or prosecution by any law
enforcement or prosecuting agency

8.

The Defendant admits the allegations in paragraph 8 of the Complaint. The


Defendant states further that on April 13, 2015, the Defendant notified Plaintiff in
writing that the request was dated April 10, 2015 and received on April 13, 2015.

9.

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 9 of Plaintiffs Complaint, the


Defendant states that the allegations call for a legal conclusion and therefore
require no admission or denial. To the extent it can be construed that the
allegations do require an admission or denial, the allegations are denied.

10.

The Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of the Complaint.

11.

The Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 11 of the Complaint.

12.

The Defendant is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations


contained in paragraph 12 of the Complaint; therefore, the same are denied.

13.

The Defendant admits that the Plaintiff made a second request as attached in
Exhibit C. As to the other allegations contained in paragraph 13, the Defendant
states that the allegations call for a legal conclusion and therefore, require no
admission or denial. To the extent it can be construed that the allegations do
require an admission or denial, the allegations are denied.

14.

The Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of the Complaint.

15.

The Defendant is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations


contained in paragraph 15 of the Complaint; therefore, the same are denied.

16.

The Defendant is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations


contained in paragraph 16 of the Complaint; therefore, the same are denied.

17.

As to the allegations contained in paragraph 17 of the Complaint, the Defendant


states that the allegations call for a legal conclusion and therefore, require no

admission or denial. To the extent it can be construed that the allegations do


require an admission or denial, the allegations are denied.
18.

Defendant admits that APD held a press conference. As to the remainder of the
allegations contained in paragraph 18 of the Complaint, the Defendant states that
the allegations call for a legal conclusion and therefore, require no admission or
denial. To the extent it can be construed that the remainder of the allegations do
require an admission or denial, the allegations are denied.

19.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 19 of the Complaint.

20.

Defendant admits there was a press conference on May 8, 2015. Defendant


denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 20 of the Complaint.

21.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 21 of the Complaint.

22.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of the Complaint.

23.

Defendant is without knowledge of the information contained in paragraph 23 of


the Complaint.

24.

Defendant is without knowledge of the information contained in paragraph 24 of


the Complaint.

25.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 25 of the Complaint.

26.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the Complaint.

27.

The Defendant states that the allegations in paragraph 27 call for a legal
conclusion and therefore, require no admission or denial. To the extent it can be
construed that the allegations do require an admission or denial, the allegations
are denied.

28.

The Defendant states that the allegations call for a legal conclusion and therefore,
require no admission or denial. To the extent it can be construed that the
allegations do require an admission or denial, the allegations are denied.

29.

The Defendant admits that the Plaintiff was not provided a copy of the cell phone
video shown to her, but is without sufficient information to admit or deny the
remainder of the allegations contained in paragraph 29 of the Complaint;
therefore, the same are denied.

30.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 30 of the Complaint, and


states further that the cell phone video is exempt from release under IPRA, as
stated in Paragraph 7 of its Answer.

31.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 31 of the Complaint.

32.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 32 of the Complaint.

33.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 33 of the Complaint.

34.

Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 34 of the Complaint.


First Cause of Action

35.

Defendant is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations


contained in paragraph 35 of the Complaint; therefore, the same are denied.

36.

Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 36 of the Complaint.

37.

As to the allegations contained in paragraph 37 of the Complaint, the Defendant


states that the allegations call for a legal conclusion and therefore, require no
admission or denial. To the extent it can be construed that the allegations do
require an admission or denial, the allegations are denied.

38.

Defendant denies allegations contained in paragraph 38 of the Complaint.

39.

As to the allegations contained in paragraph 39 of the Complaint, the Defendant


states that the allegations call for a legal conclusion and therefore, require no
admission or denial. To the extent it can be construed that the allegations do
require an admission or denial, the allegations are denied.

40.

As to the allegations contained in paragraph 40 of the Complaint, the Defendant


states that the allegations call for a legal conclusion and therefore, require no
admission or denial. To the extent it can be construed that the allegations do
require an admission or denial, the allegations are denied.

41.

As to the allegations contained in paragraph 41 of the Complaint, the Defendant


states that Inspection of Public Records Act speaks for itself, but denies any
implication of liability.

42.

As to the allegations contained in paragraph 42 of the Complaint, the Defendant


states that Inspection of Public Records Act speaks for itself, but denies any
implication of liability.

43.

As to the allegations contained in paragraph 43 of the Complaint, the Defendant


states that Inspection of Public Records Act speaks for itself, but denies any
implication of liability.

WHEREFORE, the Defendant City of Albuquerque prays the complaint be dismissed


with prejudice, for any costs it has incurred herein and for such other and further relief as the
Court may deem just and proper.
Respectfully Submitted,
CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE
Jessica M. Hernandez
City Attorney

/s/ Kevin Morrow


Kevin Morrow
Assistant City Attorney
P. O. Box 2248
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103
(505) 768-4500

This is to certify that a copy of the


foregoing was electronically mailed via
the courts electronic filing system Odyssey
on August 14, 2015:
Ahmad Assed, Esq.
Ahmad Assed & Associates
818 5th Street NW
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Tel: (505) 246-8373
/s/ Kevin Morrow
Kevin Morrow
Assistant City Attorney

You might also like