Yarber Lawsuit Combined Filed

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 1 of 11
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION
KIMBERLY V. BRACEY
PLAINTIFF
VS.
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:16-CV-657-DPJ-FKB
CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI;

MAYOR TONY YARBER INDIVIDUALLY
AND IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
JOHN DOES 1-3
DEFENDANTS
TONY YARBERS ANSWER, DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIM

(JURY TRIAL REQUESTED)
COMES NOW, Answering Defendant, Tony Yarber, in his individual capacity, by and
through counsel, and files this his Answer, Defenses, and Counterclaim as follows:
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against
Answering Defendant. Accordingly, Answering Defendant moves this Court for a dismissal with
prejudice of the Plaintiffs Amended Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Amended Complaint is barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Some or all of the claims of the Plaintiff are barred by waiver.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Some or all of the claims of the Plaintiff are barred by her failure to exhaust
administrative remedies.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Affirmatively and alternatively, and without waiving any other defenses asserted herein,
Page 1 of 11
Answering Defendant hereby pleads any and all defenses available under the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure and United States and Mississippi law.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The Amended Complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause or causes of
action against this Answering Defendant.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiffs claims are barred, in whole or in part, because Plaintiff failed to mitigate any
injuries and damages she has allegedly suffered.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
To the extent Plaintiff claims any damages suffered by her are attributable to this
Answering Defendant, any such damages were the result of Plaintiffs own acts, omissions
and/or the acts or omissions of third parties for which Answering Defendant has no legal
responsibility.
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiffs claims are barred, in whole or in part, because this Answering Defendant did
not owe any legal duty to Plaintiff or, if Answering Defendant owed any such legal duty,
Answering Defendant did not breach that duty.
TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
To the extent that the Amended Complaint seeks any award or assessment of punitive
damages against this Answering Defendant, such award would be contrary to the laws of the state
of Mississippi and the laws of the United States of America, and would be violative of the Fifth,
Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the
State of Mississippi.
ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Answering Defendant cannot be held liable for punitive damages, because at no time did
he act maliciously, fraudulently or with any intent to harm the Plaintiff or to deprive her of any
Page 2 of 11
legally protected rights.

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Answering Defendant pleads any and all defenses and affirmative defenses available to
him which may become applicable through discovery and during the trial of this cause.
THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Affirmatively and alternatively, and without waiving any other defenses elsewhere
asserted herein, and the facts having not been fully developed, Answering Defendant would
affirmatively plead any and all affirmative defenses as may be applicable in this action: accord
and satisfaction, antenuptial knowledge, arbitration and award, assumption of risk, condonation,
constructive desertion, contributory negligence, discharge and bankruptcy, duress, estoppel,
failure of consideration, failure to mitigate damages, fraud, illegality, impossibility, insufficient
process, insufficient service of process, injury by fellow servant, laches, lack of capacity to
commit the offense, lack of standing, license, payment, preexisting injuries or damages,
reconciliation, recrimination, reformation, release, res judicata, statute of frauds, statute of
limitations, waiver, and any other matter constituting an avoidance or affirmative defense.
FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE AND ANSWER
This Answering Defendant responds to the allegations of the Amended Complaint,
paragraph by paragraph and incorporates by reference all affirmative defenses heretofore
mentioned, as follows:
1.
This Answering Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
either admit or deny the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Amended Complaint, and
insofar as the allegations pertain to this Answering Defendant, they are denied and Answering
Defendant demands specific proof thereof.
2.
The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 2 of the Amended Complaint are
Admitted.
3.
The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 3 of the Amended Complaint are

Page 3 of 11
Denied.
4.
The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 4 of the Amended Complaint
that pertain to this Answering Defendant are Denied and this Defendant demands specific proof
thereof.
5.
thereof.
6.
thereof.
7.
that pertain to this Answering Defendant are Admitted as to the fact that on April 24, 2014, Tony
Yarber did employ the Plaintiff as his Executive Assistant. However, that was changed shortly
thereafter and she was required to directly report to Beatrice Slaughter for the rest of her tenure
as an employee with the City of Jackson in the Mayors office.
8.
9.
thereof.
10.
Page 4 of 11
11.
thereof.
12.
thereof.
13.
thereof.
14.
thereof.
15.
thereof.
16.
thereof.
17.
thereof.
18.
thereof.
19.
Page 5 of 11
thereof.
20.
thereof.
21.
thereof.
22.
thereof.
23.
are Denied.
24.
are Denied.
25.
are Denied.
26.
are Denied.
COUNT I
27.
Answering Defendant re-alleges each and every Affirmative Defense and response
set forth in paragraphs 1 through 26 as if fully set forth herein.

28.
thereof.
29.
Page 6 of 11
thereof.
COUNT II
30.

31.
thereof.
32.
thereof.
COUNT III
33.

34.
thereof.
35.
thereof.
36.
thereof.
37.
In that the unnumbered paragraph appearing after the term WHEREFORE,
PREMISES CONSIDERED of the Amended Complaint contains no factual allegations,

Answering Defendant asserts no belief as to the truth of said paragraph, but Answering
Defendant would deny that the Plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought in said paragraph and any
Page 7 of 11
and all subsections of said unnumbered paragraph.

COUNTERCLAIM
Now having fully answered the Amended Complaint, Answering Defendant herein
assumes the role of counterclaimant and would show unto this Court the following:
PARTIES
1.
Counter-Plaintiff, Tony Yarber, is an adult resident citizen of the First Judicial
District of Hinds County, Mississippi.

2.
Counter-Defendant, Kimberly V. Bracey, upon information and belief, is an adult
resident citizen of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi who can be served with
process by and through her attorney of record in this matter.
FACTS
3.
That on or about August 25, 2016, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant filed a Complaint
in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff engaged in a

sexual relationship with her, among other false statements.
4.
in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff engaged in

numerous sexual relationships with other women during this time, among other false
statements.
5.
in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff sexually

harassed her, among other false statements.
6.
in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff committed

retaliation against her, among other false statements.
7.
That on or about August 29, 2016, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant filed an Amended
Complaint in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff

Page 8 of 11
engaged in a sexual relationship with her, among other false statements.

8.

engaged in numerous sexual relationships with other women during this time, among other
false statements.
9.

sexually harassed her, among other false statements.
10.

committed retaliation against her, among other false statements.
11.
That on or about September 7, 2016, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant caused
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff to be served with a Summons and copy of the Amended Complaint.

COUNT I - ABUSE OF PROCESS
12.
Counter-Plaintiff repeats, reiterates, realleges and incorporates by reference each
and every allegation contained in paragraphs numbered 1 through 11 of this Counterclaim with
the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at length herein.
13.
That the filing of the Complaint and the filing and service of the Amended
Complaint containing false allegations against the Counter-Plaintiff by the Counter-Defendant is

a malicious perversion of a regularly issued civil process, for a purpose and to obtain a result not
lawfully warranted or properly attainable thereby.
14.
That the actions of the Counter-Defendant were done with the intent to abuse the
privileges of the legal system.

15.
The actions of the Counter-Defendant constitute abuse of process.
16.
That as a direct and proximate result of said abuse of process, Counter-Plaintiff
has been caused to suffer damages of a personal and pecuniary nature, including but not limited
Page 9 of 11
to out of pocket expenses, damage to reputation, attorneys fees, and other damages to be proven
at trial.
COUNT II - DEFAMATION
17.
18.
At all times material and relevant, the Counter-Defendant made numerous false
and defamatory statements concerning Counter-Plaintiff.

19.
That at all times material and relevant, said statements were unprivileged and
were published to third parties.

20.
At all times material and relevant, said statements were made with malice,
recklessness and with knowledge that said statements were false.

21.
The actions of the Counter-Defendant constitute defamation.
22.
That as a direct and proximate result of said defamation, Counter-Plaintiff has
been caused to suffer damages of a personal and pecuniary nature, including but not limited to
out of pocket expenses, damage to reputation, attorneys fees, and other damages to be proven at
trial.
DAMAGES
23.
24.
As a direct and proximate result of the Counter-Defendants actions, inactions,
refusals and omissions, the Counter-Plaintiff has suffered injuries of a personal and pecuniary
nature, including, but not limited to, out of pocket expenses, damage to reputation, attorneys
fees, and other damages to be proven at trial.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Counter-Plaintiff prays that the
Page 10 of 11
Plaintiffs Amended Complaint be dismissed with prejudice and that this Court award judgment
to the Counter-Plaintiff of, from, and against the Counter-Defendant, Kimberly V. Bracey, in a
sum that will fully and fairly compensate the Counter- Plaintiff for his loss, plus cost of court,
reasonable attorney fees and any other relief that this Court or a jury deems just and proper.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this the 24th day of October, 2016.
Tony Yarber, Individually
/s/ M. Judith Barnett
M. JUDITH BARNETT
M. JUDITH BARNETT (MSB #99766)

M. JUDITH BARNETT, P.A.
1911 Dunbarton Drive
Jackson, Mississippi 39216
Telephone: (601) 981-4450
Facsimile: (601) 981-4717
mjbarnettpa@yahoo.com
Attorney for Tony Yarber
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I, M. Judith Barnett, attorney for Tony Yarber, have this date served,
via the CM/ECF filing system, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Answer,
Defenses, and Counterclaim to the following Counsel of Record:
Louis H. Watson, Jr., Esq.
Nick Norris, Esq.
Watson & Norris, PLLC
1880 Lakeland Drive, Suite G
Jackson, MS 39216-4972
LaToya C. Merritt, Esq.
Jason T. Marsh, Esq.
Phelps Dunbar, LLP
P.O. Box 16114
Jackson, MS 39236-6114
SO CERTIFIED, this the 24th day of October, 2016.
/s/ M. Judith Barnett
M. JUDITH BARNETT
Page 11 of 11
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION
KIMBERLY V. BRACEY
VS.
PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:16-CV-657-DPJ-FKB
CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI;

MAYOR TONY YARBER INDIVIDUALLY
AND IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
JOHN DOES 1-3
DEFENDANTS
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Kimberly V. Bracey, by and through her counsel,
Watson & Norris, PLLC, and files this action against Defendants, City of Jackson,
Mississippi, Mayor Tony Yarber and John Does 1-3. As more specifically set forth
below, Plaintiff has been subjected to sex discrimination, sexual harassment, a sexually
hostile work place in violation of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended, has been unlawfully retaliated against in the terms and conditions of her
employment with Defendant, City of Jackson, Mississippi, has been subjected to
violations of the 14th Amendment, Equal Protection, by Defendant Mayor Tony Yarber
and has suffered violations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act by
Defendants.
In support of this cause, the Plaintiff would show unto the Court the
following facts to-wit:

PARTIES
1.
The Plaintiff, Kimberly V. Bracey, is an adult female resident of Hinds
County, Mississippi, residing at 6331 Lyndon B. Johnson Drive, Jackson, MS 39213.
2,
Defendant, City of Jackson, Mississippi, is a municipality in the state of
Mississippi and may be served through the City Clerk, Kristi Moore, 219 South
President Street, Jackson, MS 39205.
3.
Defendant, Mayor Tony Yarber, may be served with process by serving
the Office of the Mayor, 219 S. President Street, Jackson, MS 39205.

4.
In addition to the Defendants identified above, there are Defendants
whose identities are presently unknown to Plaintiff. These unknown Defendants are
identified as John Doe Defendants 1-3 pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Every allegation in the Complaint is an allegation and a filing as of this date against
each John Doe Defendant.
These Defendants are persons whose identities are
unknown at this time; however, they are believed to be employees of Defendant, City of
Jackson, Mississippi.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5.
This Court has federal question jurisdiction.
6.
This Court has personal and subject matter jurisdiction over the
Defendants and venue is proper in this Court. A true and correct copy of Plaintiffs
Charge of Discrimination is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and a true and correct copy
of the EEOCs Dismissal and Notice of Rights is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
7.
Plaintiff was hired by Defendant on April 24, 2014 as an Executive
Assistant to the Mayor, Tony Yarber. As such, Defendant Tony Yarber was in a position
of direct authority over Plaintiff.
8.
In May 2014, Plaintiff separated from her husband and moved in with
Monica Joiner, who is the City Attorney for Defendant City of Jackson, Mississippi.
9.
During this time Defendant, Tony Yarber, engaged in a sexual relationship
with Plaintiff. Plaintiff did not make Ms. Joiner aware of this relationship as Ms. Joiner
was also actively pursuing a sexual relationship Defendant Yarber. Plaintiff was also
aware that Defendant Yarber engaged in numerous sexual relationships with other
women during this time.
10.
In July 2014, Plaintiff reconciled her relationship with her husband and
moved back into their family home.

11.
At this point, Plaintiff ended her consensual relationship with Defendant
Yarber.
12.
In response, Defendant Yarber transferred Plaintiff to be supervised by
other staff members.

13.
Around this same time, Defendant Yarber began forcing Plaintiff to
continue the sexual relationship by making it clear that she could be terminated if she
did not have sex with him. Plaintiff was the sole source of income for her family at this
time, and could not easily find comparable work.
14.
Defendant Yarber has requested Plaintiff to encourage another female to
give Defendant Yarber oral sex in exchange for guaranteed employment.

15.
Defendant Yarber subjected Plaintiff to inappropriate sexual comments
about other women on several occasions.

16.
In May or June 2014, Plaintiff was required to attend a fundraiser arranged
by Marshand Crisler in New Orleans, Louisiana. Mitzi Bickers, who is a campaign
contributor for Defendant Yarber, hosted a dinner at a restaurant in New Orleans where
numerous city staff members were in attendance.
Later that evening, Plaintiff,
Defendant Yarber, Jason Goree, Torrence Mayfield and Jackie Anderson Woods met
Ms. Bickers at a strip club where Ms. Bickers paid for everything. Plaintiff and Mr.
Mayfield were required to watch the door where Mayor Yarber and one of the strippers
went into to be alone.
17.
In August 2014, Plaintiff was required to attend another fundraiser for
Defendant Yarber in Atlanta, Georgia, that was hosted by Mitzi Bickers. After the
fundraiser, Defendant Yarber, Plaintiff, Jackie Woods, Artie Stuckey and Jason Goree
rode by boat with Ms. Bickers to one of her friends house. Prior to arriving at the home
Plaintiff had been informed they were going for a dinner. Instead, Plaintiff and others
were greeted by strippers wearing only body paint.
18.
In August or September 2014, Plaintiff was required to attend another
fundraiser for Defendant Yarber and Tyrone Lewis in Atlanta that was hosted by Mitzi
Bickers. Ms. Bickers had arranged for a woman to have a sexual relationship with
Defendant Yarber while Plaintiff was attending this fundraiser in Atlanta, Georgia. The
next day after the fundraiser, Plaintiff was required to go with Defendant Yarber for
another gathering at Ms. Bickers home.
greeted them at the door.
Again strippers wearing only body paint
While Tyrone Lewis and his staff were present at the
fundraiser, they were not present the next day when strippers were present at Ms.
Bickers home.
19.
In early April 2015, Plaintiff could not take the harassment any longer, and
chose to refuse any further advances even if it meant her employment would be
terminated.
20.
On April 26, 2015, Plaintiff was falsely accused by Mayor Yarber of
unauthorized use of city equipment for personal use.

termination by Jackie Woods, her supervisor.
Plaintiff was threatened with
Plaintiff was then placed under the
supervision of Beatrice Slaughter and told by email from Mayor Yarber, who copied the
City Attorney on the email, that Plaintiff would no longer be under the supervision of
Jackie Woods.
21.
On April 27, 2015, Plaintiff was abruptly terminated by Mayor Yarber.
Around this same time, Plaintiff learned that City of Jackson, MS employees unlawfully
accessed her private Google e-mail account to assert Plaintiff was using city equipment
for personal use.
Defendant John Does 1-3 unlawfully accessed Plaintiffs private
Google e-mail account to pull a flyer for the campaign of Plaintiffs husband to falsely
claim Plaintiff had printed or copied the flyer hundreds of times to be used for the
campaign.
22.
Plaintiff had verbal authorization from her director, Beatrice Slaughter, to
use the citys equipment to make copies for her husbands campaign and to keep a log
of the copies, which she did.
While Plaintiff did use the citys equipment with
authorization from her supervisor, the particular flyer pulled from her private e-mail
account was never copied using city equipment.
23.
During her tenure as Executive Assistant to Mayor Yarber and her job with
the City of Jackson, Mississippi, Plaintiff always performed her job duties above
satisfactory and had a good work record.
24.
In truth, Plaintiff was terminated for refusing the sexual advances of Tony
Yarber, Mayor of the City of Jackson, Mississippi.

25.
To Plaintiffs knowledge, there were two other female city employees who
were terminated because they refused sexual advances from Tony Yarber while he was
acting as the Mayor of the City of Jackson, Mississippi.
26.
Further, to Plaintiffs knowledge, there were two other co-workers who
violated the same work rule (unauthorized use of city equipment), but were not
disciplined or discharged.
CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT I - VIOLATION OF TITLE VII - SEXUAL HARASSMENT
AND THE 14TH AMENDMENT THROUGH 1983 EQUAL PROTECTION
27.
Plaintiff incorporates the above paragraphs 1 through 26 as though
specifically set forth herein and alleges as follows:

28.
The actions of Tony Yarber, acting in his individual and official capacity as
Mayor of the Defendant, the City of Jackson, constitute unlawful sexual harassment.
29.
The acts of the Defendants constitute a willful and intentional violation of
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the 14th Amendment through
1983, and entitle Plaintiff to the recovery of damages.
COUNT II VIOLATIONS OF TITLE VII AND THE
14TH AMENDMENT THROUGH 1983 RETALIATION
30.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates all averments set forth through
Paragraphs 1 through 29 above as though specifically set forth herein.

31.
Defendant City of Jackson, Mississippi has violated Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 and Defendants have violated the 14th Amendment through 42
U.S.C. 1983 by retaliating against Plaintiff for refusing the sexual advances of the Mayor
of the City of Jackson, Mississippi, Tony Yarber.
32.
As a result of Defendants said retaliation, Plaintiff suffered damages,
including, but not limited to, compensatory damages, loss of reputation, humiliation,
embarrassment, emotional pain and suffering, inconvenience, and mental anguish.
COUNT III VIOLATION OF THE ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY ACT and the STORAGE COMMUNICATIONS ACT
33.
Plaintiff incorporates the above paragraphs 1 through 32 as though
specifically set forth herein and alleges as follows:

34.
By unlawfully accessing Plaintiffs personal email account as an
employee, agent and/or representative of the City of Jackson, Defendant City of

Jackson, Mississippi, along with John Does 1-3 violated the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act of 1986 as well as the Storage Communication Act.
35.
Plaintiff has been harmed as a result of Defendants actions, and the
Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for the same.

36.
The acts of the Defendants and their employees, agents and
representatives constitute a willful intentional violation of the Electronic Communications

Privacy Act of 1986, 18 U.S.C. 2510 et seq., and other state and federal laws, and
entitle Plaintiff to recovery of damages, both compensatory and punitive in nature.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully prays that upon
hearing of this matter by a jury, the Plaintiff be granted the following relief in an amount
to be determined by the jury:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Reinstatement or future wages in lieu of reinstatement;

Back pay;
Compensatory damages;
Punitive damages;
Attorneys fees;
Costs and expenses; and
Any other relief to which she may be properly entitled.
THIS, the 29th day of August 2016.

Respectfully submitted,
KIMBERLY V. BRACEY, PLAINTIFF
By:
OF COUNSEL:
WATSON & NORRIS, PLLC
1880 Lakeland Drive, Suite G
Jackson, Mississippi 39216-4972
Telephone: (601) 968-0000
Facsimile: (601) 968-0010
Email: louis@watsonnorris.com
/s Nick Norris
Louis H. Watson, Jr. (MB# 9053)
Nick Norris (MB#101574)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, NICK NORRIS, attorney for the Plaintiff, do hereby certify that I have this day
served via ECF filing or by United States mail, postage prepaid, a true and correct copy
of the above and foregoing document to the following counsel of record:
City of Jackson, Mississippi
City Clerk - Kristi Moore
219 South President Street
Jackson, MS 39205
Mayor Tony Yarber,
Office of the Mayor
219 S. President Street
Jackson, MS 39205
SO CERTIFIED, this the 29th day of August 2016.
s/Nick Norris
NICK NORRIS
Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 1-1 Filed 08/25/16 Page 1 of 1
Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 1-2 Filed 08/25/16 Page 1 of 1

Yarber Lawsuit Combined Filed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yarber Lawsuit Combined Filed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:16-CV-657-DPJ-FKB

CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI;

TONY YARBERS ANSWER, DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIM

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 2 of 11

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 3 of 11

legally protected rights.

This Answering Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 2 of the Amended Complaint are

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 3 of the Amended Complaint are

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 4 of 11

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 4 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 5 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 6 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 7 of the Amended Complaint

This Answering Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 9 of the Amended Complaint

This Answering Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 5 of 11

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 11 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 12 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 13 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 14 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 15 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 16 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 17 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 18 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 19 of the Amended Complaint

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 6 of 11

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 20 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 21 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 22 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 23 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 24 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 25 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 26 of the Amended Complaint

set forth in paragraphs 1 through 26 as if fully set forth herein.

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 28 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 29 of the Amended Complaint

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 7 of 11

set forth in paragraphs 1 through 29 as if fully set forth herein.

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 31 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 32 of the Amended Complaint

set forth in paragraphs 1 through 32 as if fully set forth herein.

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 34 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 35 of the Amended Complaint

The allegations contained in Paragraph numbered 36 of the Amended Complaint

In that the unnumbered paragraph appearing after the term WHEREFORE,

PREMISES CONSIDERED of the Amended Complaint contains no factual allegations,

Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 8 of 11

and all subsections of said unnumbered paragraph.

Counter-Plaintiff, Tony Yarber, is an adult resident citizen of the First Judicial

District of Hinds County, Mississippi.

Counter-Defendant, Kimberly V. Bracey, upon information and belief, is an adult

That on or about August 25, 2016, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant filed a Complaint

in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff engaged in a

That on or about August 25, 2016, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant filed a Complaint

in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff engaged in

That on or about August 25, 2016, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant filed a Complaint

in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff sexually

That on or about August 25, 2016, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant filed a Complaint

in the above-referenced matter falsely alleging that the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff committed

That on or about August 29, 2016, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant filed an Amended