1 

Marc A. Riondino, City Attorney 

Office of City Attorney 

City Hall, Suite 419 

P. O. Box 95120 

Camden, New Jersey 08101-5120 

(856) 757-7170 

By: Michelle Banks-Spearman, Assistant City Attorney 

Attorney for Defendant, City of Camden 

______________________________________ 

CCTS TAX LIENS I, L.L.C., a New Jersey 

Limited Liability Company, and CCTS 

CAMDEN OPPORTUNITY FUND, L.L.C., a 

New Jersey Limited Liability Company, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICAN and the 

City of Camden a Municipal Corporation of 

The State of New Jersey; 

 Defendants 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

CIVIL ACTION 

NO. 1: 11-cv-00191-(JHR-AMD) 

ANSWER AND DEFENSES 

Defendant, City of Camden (the “City”), by way of answer to plaintiffs’ 

complaint, does hereby say: 

Jurisdiction and Venue 

1. Admitted. 

2. Admitted.

General Allegations and Parties 

3. Admitted.

4. Admitted.

5. Admitted.

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 1 of 12 PageID: 16
2 

The Real Properties Affected by this Action 

30 Leonard Avenue, Block 1114, Lot 67, Camden City 

6. Admitted. 

7. The City neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 7, but 

leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

8. Admitted that according to the City of Camden’s records the owner of 30 Leonard 

Avenue is the Administrator of Veterans Affairs. 

9. Admitted. 

10. Admitted. 

11. Admitted. 

12. It is admitted that a tax sale certificate bearing number 7A-02021 was issued to CCTS 

Tax Lien I, LLC. The City neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in the 

balance of Par. 12 but leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

13. The City neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 13, 

but leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

1104 MacArthur Drive, Block 635, Lot 10, Camden City

14. Admitted. 

15. The City neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 15, 

but leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

16. The City admits that according to its records the record owner of 1105 MacArthur 

Drive is the Administrator of Veterans Affairs. 

17. Admitted. 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 2 of 12 PageID: 17
3 

18. Admitted. 

19. Admitted. 

20. The City admits that a tax sale certificate bearing number 6-0664 was issued to CCTS 

Tax Lien I, LLC. The City neither admits or denies the truth of the allegations 

contained in the balance of Paragraph 20 and leaves Plaintff’s to their proofs. 

21. Admitted. 

22. The City admits that a tax sale certificate bearing number 7-0733 was issued to CCTS 

Tax Lien I, LLC memorializing the sale. The City neither admits nor denies the truth 

of the allegations contained in the balance of Paragraph 22 and leaves Plaintiff’s to 

their proofs. 

23. Admitted. 

24. The City admits that a tax sale certificate bearing number 7A-00792 was issued to 

CCTS Tax Lien I, LLC memorializing the sale. The City neither admits nor denies 

the truth of the allegations contained in the balance of Paragraph 24 and leaves 

Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

25. Admitted. 

26. The City admits that a tax sale certificate bearing number 08—00842 was issued to 

CCTS Tax Lien I, LLC memorializing the sale. The City neither admits nor denies 

the truth of the allegations contained in the balance of Paragraph 26 and leaves 

Plaintiff’s to their proofs. 

27. The City neither admits or denies the truth of the allegations set forth in Par. 27 but 

leaves Plaintiff’s to their proofs. 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 3 of 12 PageID: 18
4 

REAR 1268 MORTON STREET, BLOCK 1354, LOT 148, CAMDEN CITY

28. Admitted. 

29. The City neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations set forth in Par. 29 but 

leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

30. It is admitted that the City’s records show the record owner of Rear 1268 Morton 

Street is the Secretary of HUD. 

31. Admitted. 

32. Admitted. 

33. Admitted. 

34. The City admits that a tax sale certificate bearing number 34521 was issued to the 

City of Camden for the sum of $47.77 and recorded on November 17, 2005 in 

Mortgage Book 8009 at Page 279. 

35. Admitted. 

36. Admitted 

37. The City neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 37 

and leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

COUNT ONE 

(QUIET TITLE & DECLARATORY JUDGMENT) 

38. The City repeats the above answers as if set forth here at length. 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 4 of 12 PageID: 19
5 

39. This allegation is not directed at the City of Camden, so the City makes no answer to 

this allegation. 

40. This is a legal conclusion, which the City is not required to answer. The City leaves 

Plaintiffs to its proofs at trial. 

41. This is a legal conclusion, which the City is not required to answer. The City leaves 

Plaintiffs to its proofs at trial. 

42. Plaintiff neither or admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 42 

and leaves Plaintiff’s their proofs. 

43. Plaintiff neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 43 

and leaves Plaintiff’s to their proofs. 

44. Plaintiff neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 44 and 

leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

COUNT TWO 

REFUND FROM CAMDEN CITY 

45. Defendant City of Camden repeats the above answers as if set forth herein at length. 

46. The City of Camden neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in 

Par. 46 but leaves Plaintiffs’ to their proofs. 

47. The City of Camden neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in 

Par. 47 but leaves Plaintiffs’ to their proofs. 

48. The City of Camden neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in 

Par. 48 but leaves Plaintiffs’ to their proofs. 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 5 of 12 PageID: 20
6 

49. The City of Camden neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in 

Par. 49 but leaves Plaintiffs’ to their proofs. 

COUNT THREE 

(FORECLOSURE) 

50. The City repeats the above answers as if set forth herein at length. 

51. This Par. 51 is not an allegation of fact and the City makes no answer to this Par. 51. 

52. Admitted. 

53. Admitted. 

54. Denied. 

55. The City neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 55, 

but leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

56. The City neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 56, 

but leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

57. The City neither admits nor denies the truth of the allegations contained in Par. 57, 

but leaves Plaintiffs to their proofs. 

. 

Conclusion/Demand 

WHEREFORE, Answering defendant demands judgment in its favor as follows: 

A. A determination that the tax sale certificates are valid; and 

B. Granting Plaintiff’s relief, except that if the Court determines that Tax 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 6 of 12 PageID: 21
7 

Sale Certificate Number 34521 is invalid that any refund determined to be 

due Plaintiff is owed from the Tax Lien Financing Corporation and not the 

City of Camden; and 

C. For such other relief as the court deems equitable and just. 

SEPARATE DEFENSES

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be 

granted, and answering defendants reserve the right to move to dismiss plaintiff’s 

Complaint on those grounds. 

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff’s Complaint is barred in whole or in part, and the proceeds and/or any 

recovery resulting therefrom are barred, limited, and/or controlled by any/all provisions 

of the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, N.J.S.A. 59:1-1 et seq., and the plaintiff’s failure to 

comply with the said provisions, including as if listed herein separately and particularly 

each and every section encompassed therein. 

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Defendants are immune from suit for the acts alleged in plaintiff’s Complaint 

pursuant to the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, N.J.S.A. 59:5 –2. 

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s Complaint is barred in whole or in part due to the absolute and/or 

qualified immunity accorded to the defendants. 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 7 of 12 PageID: 22
8 

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Answering defendants performed each and every duty owed to the plaintiff. If 

defendants are found to have breached any obligation or duty owed to the plaintiff, which 

breach is specifically denied, such breach was not the proximate cause of any injury or 

loss that the plaintiff may have sustained. 

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 The answering defendants were not guilty of negligence and did not breach or 

violate any duty or obligation owed to the plaintiff. 

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s Complaint is barred in whole or in part, as the answering defendant is 

immune by virtue of the good faith exercise of its agents, servants and employees official 

duties. 

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 The defendants, their agents, servants and/or employees, acted upon reasonable 

grounds and without malice and are therefore not answerable to the plaintiff for damages 

or losses. 

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 These defendants performed all contractual and/or other duties to the plaintiff 

and/or any other interested party as complained of in this action. 

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 8 of 12 PageID: 23
9 

 The incident described in the Complaint was caused wholly or partly by the 

negligence or intentional acts of the plaintiff, and plaintiff is barred from recovery, or his 

recovery is reduced thereby. 

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Defendants submit that the within suit is without legal or factual merit, and said 

Answering defendants hereby reserve the right to seek appropriate relief under the New 

Jersey Frivolous Law Suit Statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:15-59.1 et seq. 

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Defendants acted reasonably and in good faith based upon the information 

available to them at the time of the incident. 

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Plaintiff’s Complaint is barred by the Doctrine of equitable/legal estoppel. 

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 Plaintiff's Complaint is barred by the Doctrine of unclean hands. 

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 The plaintiff's contributory negligence and/or deliberate action was the sole 

proximate cause of any alleged damages suffered by the plaintiff. 

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

 In the event that it is found that the acts of the agents, servants or employees of 

the defendant were performed with malice and based upon unreasonable grounds, said 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 9 of 12 PageID: 24
10 

acts are outside the scope of authorization from the defendant, City of Camden, and are 

outside the scope of its employment. As such, Defendant City of Camden is not 

answerable to the plaintiff for damages, as liability would not attach to said defendant. 

 WHEREFORE, defendant, City of Camden, hereby demands judgment in 

its favor as follows: 

A. Dismissing the Complaint as to the City of Camden; and 

B. For such other relief as the court deems equitable and just. 

Marc A. Riondino 

City Attorney 

Date: November 17, 2010 By: s/s:Michelle Banks-Spearman 

 MICHELLE BANKS-SPEARMAN 

 Assistant City Attorney 

RESERVATION OF DEFENSES AND OBJECTIONS

 The answering defendant hereby reserves the right to interpose such other 

defenses and objections as continuing investigation may disclose. 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 10 of 12 PageID: 25
11 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO L.CIV.R. 11.2

 I certify, that to the best of my knowledge and belief, that the matter in controversy 

is not the subject matter of any other action pending in any Court, nor of any pending 

arbitration or administrative proceeding. 

Date: January 28, 2011 By: s/s Michelle Banks-Spearman

 MICHELLE BANKS-SPEARMAN 

 Assistant City Attorney 

DESIGNATION OF TRIAL COUNSEL

 Pursuant to R. 4:25-4, Michelle Banks-Spearman, Assistant City Attorney, is hereby 

designated as trial counsel in the above matter. 

Michelle Banks-Spearman 

City Attorney 

Date: January 28, 2011 By: s/s Michelle Banks-Spearman 

 MICHELLE BANKS-SPEARMAN 

 Assistant City Attorney 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 I, the undersigned, served electronically via CM/ECF a 

copy of the above Answer and Separate Defenses on behalf of defendant, the City of 

Camden, to Adam Greenberg, counsel to plaintiffs CCTS Tax Liens I, LLC and CCTS 

Camden Opportunity Fund, L.L.C.at 1949 Berlin Road, Suite 200,Cherry Hill, New Jersey 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 11 of 12 PageID: 26
12 

08003-3737 and to: the United States Attorney’s Office, 401 Market Street, P.O. Box 2098, 

Camden, NJ 08101. 

Date: January 28, 2011 By: s/s Michelle Banks-Spearman

 MICHELLE BANKS-SPEARMAN 

 Assistant City Attorney 

Case 1:11-cv-00191-JHR-AMD Document 3 Filed 01/28/11 Page 12 of 12 PageID: 27