As used in this Original Answer, the term “Webb County” shall include Defendant Webb1

County and the remaining Defendants in their official capacities to the extent that the remaining

Defendants’ conduct constitutes Webb County’s conduct under the law.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LAREDO DIVISION

CYNTHIA ALCALA, ET AL. §§

vs. § NO. 5:08-CV-00128§

WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS, ET AL. §

ORIGINAL ANSWER OF DEFENDANT WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE MICAELA ALVAREZ:

WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS (“Webb County”), a Defendant in the above styled

and numbered cause, files this Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ First Amended

Complaint on behalf of Webb County and the remaining Defendants in their official

capacities . In support of this Original Answer, Webb County would show as1

follows:

ADMISSIONS AND DENIALS

1. Paragraph 1 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Cynthia

Alcala (“Alcala”). No admission or denial is required.

2. Paragraph 2 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff

Rosalinda Cantu (“Cantu”). No admission or denial is required.

3. Paragraph 3 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Erika

Castillo (“Castillo”). No admission or denial is required.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 1 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 2

4. Paragraph 4 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Erika

Chavez (“Chavez”). No admission or denial is required.

5. Paragraph 5 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Raquel

Farias (“ Farias”). No admission or denial is required.

6. Paragraph 6 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Bertha

Garcia (“Garcia”). Webb County has no knowledge of an employee in the Webb

County Tax Assessor Collector’s Office identified as “Bertha Garcia”, and therefore,

can neither admit nor deny the allegations in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.

7. Paragraph 7 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Maribel

Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”). No admission or denial is required.

8. Paragraph 8 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Julissa

Guajardo (“Guajardo”). No admission or denial is required.

9. Paragraph 9 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Diana

Hernandez (“Hernandez”). No admission or denial is required.

10. Paragraph 10 of the Complaint identifies and describes Plaintiff Ileana

Rincon (“Rincon”). No admission or denial is required.

11. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 11 of the Complaint.

12. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 12 of the Complaint

that Patricia Barrera (“Barrera”) is the Webb County Tax Assessor/Collector.

13. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 13 of the Complaint

that Mary Ethel Novoa (“Novoa”) is a supervisor for the Webb County Tax

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 2 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 3

Assessor/Collector.

14. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 14 of the Complaint

that Rosa Hernandez (“R. Hernandez”) is a supervisor for the Webb County Tax

Assessor/Collector.

15. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 15 of the Complaint

that Dora Jimenez (“Jimenez”) is a supervisor for the Webb County Tax

Assessor/Collector.

16. Webb County admits only that venue is proper in this Court. Webb

County denies that it violated any of the Federal statutes referenced by Plaintiffs in

Paragraph 16 of the Complaint.

17. Webb County admits only that this court has jurisdiction. Webb

County denies that it violated any of the Federal laws referenced by Plaintiffs in

Paragraph 17 of the Complaint.

18. Webb County admits the allegations in Paragraph 18 of the Complaint.

19. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 19 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

20. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 20 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

21. Webb County denies that it organized or directed the WCTAC

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 3 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 4

employees to organize any raffle as alleged in Paragraph 21 of the Complaint.

Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the remaining allegations in Paragraph 21 of the Complaint, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny those allegations.

22. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 22 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

23. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 23 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

24. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 24 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

25. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 25 of the Complaint.

26. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 26 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

27. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 27 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

28. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 4 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 5

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 28 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

29. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 29 of the Complaint.

30. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 30 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

31. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 31 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

32. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 32 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

33. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 33 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

34. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 34 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

35. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 35 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 5 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 6

36. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 36 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

37. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 37 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

38. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 38 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

39. Webb County denies that it directed WCTAC employees to enforce

participation in any “football pots” by verbal threats of termination, intimidation or

other retaliation as alleged in Paragraph 39 of the Complaint. Webb County is

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining

allegations in Paragraph 39, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those

allegations.

40. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 40 of the Complaint.

41. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 41 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

42. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 42 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 6 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 7

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

43. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Castillo’s employment with the

WCTAC was terminated. However, according to Webb County’s records, Castillo

was terminated on September 24, 2007. Webb County denies that it has

committed any unlawful actions with respect to Plaintiff Castillo. The phrase

“another former employee (who was terminated for refusing to participate in the

illegal gambling activities)” is vague and ambiguous, as alleged in Paragraph 43 of

the Complaint; therefore, Webb County is without knowledge or information

sufficient to form a belief about this specific averment. Webb County is also

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the balance of

the allegations contained in Paragraph 43 of the Complaint.

44. Webb County admits that the AG seized items from the WCTAC

offices. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief about the remaining allegations in Paragraph 44 of the Complaint.

45. Webb County admits that the AG seized items from the WCTAC

offices. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief about the remaining allegations in Paragraph 45 of the Complaint.

46. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 46 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

47. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 7 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 8

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 47 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

48. Webb County admits that WCTAC employees were interviewed by the

AG. Webb County denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 48 of the

Complaint.

49. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 49 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

50. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 50 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

51. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 51 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

52. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 52 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

53. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 53 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

54. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 8 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 9

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 54 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

55. Webb County denies that it threatened Plaintiffs or made Plaintiffs

aware of any threats as alleged in Paragraph 55 of the Complaint.

56. Webb County denies that it directed any WCTAC employee to

threatened Plaintiffs as alleged in Paragraph 56 of the Complaint. Webb County is

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations in

Paragraph 56 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that reason can neither admit nor

deny those allegations.

57. Webb County denies that it threatened Plaintiffs or made Plaintiffs

aware of any threats as alleged in Paragraph 57 of the Complaint.

58. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 58 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

59. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 59 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

60. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 60 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

61. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 9 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 10

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 61 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

62. Webb County admits that Plaintiff D. Hernandez’ employment with the

WCTAC was terminated on March 1, 2008. Webb County is without knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations in Paragraph

62, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

63. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Farias’ employment with the

WCTAC was terminated on March 1, 2008. Webb County is without knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations in Paragraph

63, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

64. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Rincon’s employment with the

WCTAC was terminated on March 1, 2008. Webb County is without knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations in Paragraph

64, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

65. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 65 of the Complaint.

66. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 66 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

67. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 67 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 10 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 11

68. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Guajardo was terminated on

September 5, 2008. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient

to form a belief as to the remaining allegations in Paragraph 68, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

69. Webb County admits that Plaintiffs Alcala and Guajardo’s employment

with the WCTAC was terminated on September 5, 2008. Webb County denies

denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 69 of the Complaint.

70. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 70 of the Complaint.

71. Webb County admits that Plaintiffs Castillo and Chavez were

terminated on the same day. Webb County denies the remaining allegations in

Paragraph 71 of the Complaint.

72. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 72 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

73. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 73 of the Complaint.

74. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 74 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

75. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 75 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 11 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 12

76. Webb County denies the allegations of Paragraph 76 of the Complaint.

77. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Farias’ employment with the

WCTAC was terminated on March 1, 2008. Webb County is without knowledge

or information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations in

Paragraph 77, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

78. Webb County admits that Plaintiff D. Hernandez’ employment with the

WCTAC was terminated on March 1, 2008. Webb County is without knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations in Paragraph

78, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

79. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 79 of the Complaint.

80. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 80 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

81. Webb County denies that it made any of the statements alleged in

Paragraph 81 of the Complaint.

82. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 82 of the Complaint.

83. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 83 of the Complaint.

84. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 84 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

85. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 85 of the Complaint.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 12 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 13

86. Webb County denies that it knew Plaintiff Cantu’s husband was

terminally ill as alleged in Paragraph 85 of the Complaint. Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations

in Paragraph 86, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

87. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 87 of the Complaint.

88. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 88 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

89. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Cantu terminated her employment

with the WCTAC on April 7, 2008. Webb County denies the remaining allegations

of Paragraph 89 of the Complaint.

90. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 90 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

91. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 91 of the Complaint, particularly on the

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 91.

92. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 92 of the Complaint, particularly on the

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 13 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 14

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 92.

93. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 93 of the Complaint, particularly on the

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 93.

94. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 94 of the Complaint, particularly on the

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 94.

95. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 95 of the Complaint, particularly on the

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 95.

96. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 96 of the Complaint.

97. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 97 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 14 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 15

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

98. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 98 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

99. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 99 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

100. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 100 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

101. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 101 of the Complaint.

102. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 102 of the

Complaint.

103. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 103 of the Complaint.

104. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 104 of the

Complaint.

105. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 105 of the

Complaint.

106. Webb County admits that Defendant Barrera has decision-making

authority in the hiring and firing of WCTAC employees. Webb County denies the

remaining allegations in Paragraph 106 of the Complaint.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 15 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 16

107. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 107 of the Complaint.

108. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 108 of the Complaint.

109. Webb County denies that Plaintiff Alcala was wrongfully terminated.

Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to

the remaining allegations in Paragraph 109 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

110. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 110 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

111. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 111 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

112. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 112 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

113. Webb County admits that Plaintiffs Alcala and Guajardo’s employment

with the WCTAC was terminated on September 5, 2008. Webb County denies the

remaining allegations in Paragraph 113 of the Complaint.

114. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 114 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 16 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 17

115. Paragraph 115 of the Complaint makes an allegation based Plaintiff

Alcala’s “reasonable expectation”. Webb County does not know what Plaintiff

Alcala’s “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the averments contained

in Paragraph 115 of the Complaint which are based upon the Plaintiff Alcala’s

reasonable expectation.

116. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Cantu was hired in 2006, and upon

information and belief, admits that she has two children.

117. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 117 of the

Complaint.

118. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 118 of the

Complaint.

119. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegation in Paragraph 119 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny the allegation.

120. Paragraph 120 of the Complaint makes an allegation based on Plaintiff

Cantu’s “reasonable expectation.” Webb County does not know what Plaintiff

Cantu’s “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the averment contained

in Paragraph 120 of the Complaint which is based upon the Plaintiff Cantu’s

“reasonable expectation”.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 17 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 18

121. Webb County admits the allegations in Paragraph 121 of the

Complaint.

122. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 122 of the

Complaint, except that Webb County has no knowledge of whether or not Plaintiff

Castillo has “permanently” left Laredo, and therefore such allegation can neither be

admitted nor denied.

123. Paragraph 123 of the Complaint makes an allegation based on Plaintiff

Castillo’s “reasonable expectation.” Webb County does not know what Plaintiff

Castillo’s “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the averment contained

in Paragraph 123 of the Complaint which is based upon the Plaintiff Castillo’s

“reasonable expectation”.

124. As to the allegation in Paragraph 124 of the Complaint, Webb County

admits that Plaintiff Chavez was hired in 2005.

125. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 125 of the Complaint.

126. Paragraph 126 of the Complaint makes an allegation based on Plaintiff

Chavez’ “reasonable expectation.” Webb County does not know what Plaintiff

Chavez’ “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the averment contained

in Paragraph 126 of the Complaint which is based upon the Plaintiff Chavez’

“reasonable expectation”.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 18 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 19

127. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Farias’ employment with the

WCTAC began in June 1994, and that her employment was terminated on March

1, 2008. Webb County denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 127 of the

Complaint.

128. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 128 of the

Complaint.

129. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Farias and her two children were

enrolled in a health insurance plan by virtue of her employment with the WCTAC.

Webb County denies that Plaintiff Farias was wrongfully terminated. Webb County

is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining

allegations in Paragraph 129, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those

allegations.

130. Paragraph 130 of the Complaint makes an allegation based on Plaintiff

Farias’ “reasonable expectation.” Webb County does not know what Plaintiff

Farias’ “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is without knowledge

or information sufficient to form a belief about the averment contained in Paragraph

130 of the Complaint which is based upon the Plaintiff Farias’ “reasonable

expectation”.

131. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 131 of the Complaint, particularly on the

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 19 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 20

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 131.

132. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 132 of the Complaint, particularly on the

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 132.

133. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 133 of the Complaint, particularly on the

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 133.

134. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 134 of the Complaint, particularly on the

basis that Webb County cannot identify who “Garcia” is, and for that reason can

neither admit nor deny the allegations. Subject thereto, Webb County denies that it

has committed any unlawful actions as alleged in Paragraph 134.

135. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 135 of the Complaint.

136. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Gonzalez was terminated on March

25, 2008, but denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 136 of the Complaint.

137. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 20 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 21

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 137 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, and for that

reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

138. Paragraph 138 of the Complaint makes an allegation based on Plaintiff

Gonzalez’ “reasonable expectation.” Webb County does not know what Plaintiff

Gonzalez’ “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the averment contained

in Paragraph 138 of the Complaint which is based upon the Plaintiff Gonzalez’

“reasonable expectation”.

139. Webb County admits the allegation in Paragraph 139 of the Complaint.

140. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Guajardo had one child that was

enrolled in a health insurance plan by virtue of her employment with the WCTAC,

as alleged in Paragraph 140 of the Complaint.

141. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Guajardo’s employment with the

WCTAC was terminated on September 5, 2008. Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations

in Paragraph 141, and for that reason can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

142 Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 142 of the

Complaint.

143. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 143 of the

Complaint.

144. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 21 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 22

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 144 of the Complaint, and for that reason

can neither admit nor deny those allegations.

145. Paragraph 145 of the Complaint makes an allegation based on Plaintiff

Guajardo’s “reasonable expectation.” Webb County does not know what Plaintiff

Guajardo’s “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the averment contained

in Paragraph 145 of the Complaint which is based upon the Plaintiff Guajardo’s

“reasonable expectation”.

146. Webb County admits that Plaintiff D. Hernandez’ employment with the

WCTAC began in June 1994, and that she was terminated on March 1, 2008.

Webb County denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 146 of the Complaint.

147. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 147 of the

Complaint.

148. Webb County admits that Plaintiff D. Hernandez and one child were

enrolled in a health insurance plan by virtue of her employment with the WCTAC.

Webb County denies that Plaintiff D. Hernandez was wrongfully terminated. Webb

County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

remaining allegations in Paragraph 148, and for that reason can neither admit nor

deny those allegations.

149. Paragraph 149 of the Complaint makes an allegation based on Plaintiff

D. Hernandez’ “reasonable expectation.” Webb County does not know what

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 22 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 23

Plaintiff D. Hernandez’ “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the averment

contained in Paragraph 149 of the Complaint which is based upon the Plaintiff D.

Hernandez’ “reasonable expectation”.

150. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Rincon’s employment with the

WCTAC began in 1993, and that she was terminated on March 1, 2008. Webb

County denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 150 of the Complaint.

151. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 151 of the

Complaint.

152. Webb County admits that Plaintiff Rincon and her four children were

enrolled in a health insurance plan by virtue of her employment with the WCTAC.

Webb County denies that Plaintiff Rincon was wrongfully terminated. Webb

County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

remaining allegations in Paragraph 152, and for that reason can neither admit nor

deny those allegations.

153. Paragraph 153 of the Complaint makes an allegation based on Plaintiff

Rincon’s “reasonable expectation.” Webb County does not know what Plaintiff

Rincon’s “reasonable expectation” is. Therefore, Webb County is without

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the averment contained

in Paragraph 153 of the Complaint which is based upon the Plaintiff Rincon’s

“reasonable expectation”.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 23 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 24

154. Paragraph 154 of the Complaint re-alleges and incorporates by

reference Paragraphs 1 through 153 of the Complaint. Therefore, no admission or

denial is required.

155. Webb County denies the factual allegations in Paragraph 155 of the

Complaint. Additionally, Webb County specifically denies that, with respect to the

Plaintiffs, it has violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S.

Constitution or 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

156. Webb County admits that Defendants Barrera, Novoa, R. Hernandez

and Jimenez are employees of Webb County. Webb County denies the remaining

allegations in Paragraph 156 of the Complaint.

157. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 157 of the

Complaint.

158. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 158 of the

Complaint.

159. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 159 of the

Complaint.

160. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 160 of the Complaint.

161. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 161 of the

Complaint.

162. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 162 of the

Complaint.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 24 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 25

163. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 163 of the

Complaint.

164. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 164 of the Complaint.

165. Paragraph 165 of the Complaint re-alleges and incorporates by

reference Paragraphs 1 through 164 of the Complaint. Therefore, no admission or

denial is required.

166. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 166 of the Complaint.

167. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 167 of the Complaint.

168. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 168 of the

Complaint.

169. No allegations are made as to Webb County in Paragraph 169 of the

Complaint. Therefore, no admission or denial is made or required.

170. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 170 of the Complaint.

171. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 171 of the

Complaint.

172. Paragraph 172 of the Complaint re-alleges and incorporates by

reference Paragraphs 1 through 171 of the Complaint. Therefore, no admission or

denial is required.

173. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 173 of the

Complaint.

174. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 174 of the

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 25 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 26

Complaint.

175. Paragraph 175 of the Complaint re-alleges and incorporates by

reference Paragraphs 1 through 174 of the Complaint. Therefore, no admission or

denial is required.

176. Webb County denies the allegation in Paragraph 176 of the Complaint.

177. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 177 of the

Complaint.

178. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 178 of the

Complaint.

179. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 179 of the

Complaint.

180. Paragraph 180 of the Complaint re-alleges and incorporates by

reference Paragraphs 1 through 179 of the Complaint. Therefore, no admission or

denial is required.

181. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 181 of the

Complaint.

182. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 182 of the

Complaint.

183. Paragraph 183 of the Complaint re-alleges and incorporates by

reference Paragraphs 1 through 182 of the Complaint. Therefore, no admission or

denial is required.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 26 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 27

184. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 184 of the

Complaint.

185. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 185 of the

Complaint.

186. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 186 of the

Complaint.

187. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 187 of the

Complaint.

188. Paragraph 188 of the Complaint re-alleges and incorporates by

reference Paragraphs 1 through 187 of the Complaint. Therefore, no admission or

denial is required.

189. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 189 of the

Complaint.

190. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 190 of the

Complaint.

191. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 191 of the

Complaint.

192. Paragraph 192 of the Complaint re-alleges and incorporates by

reference Paragraphs 1 through 191 of the Complaint. Therefore, no admission or

denial is required.

193. Webb County is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 27 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 28

belief as to the allegations in Paragraph 193, and for that reason can neither admit

nor deny those allegations.

194. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 194 of the

Complaint.

195. Webb County denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to any of the relief

requested in Paragraph 195 of the Complaint.

196. Webb County denies the allegations in Paragraph 196 of the

Complaint.

197. Paragraph 197 of the Complaint is Plaintiffs’ demand for a trial by jury.

No admission or denial is required.

198. Webb County denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to recover any of the

damages listed in subparagraphs (a) through (h) of Paragraph 198 of the Complaint.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

199. Webb County incorporates herein paragraphs 1 through 199

hereinabove.

200. Webb County alleges that retaliation was not a motivating factor in

any decision regarding the Plaintiffs’ employment with Defendant Webb County.

201. Webb County alleges that any decisions regarding the Plaintiffs’

employment were based on legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons and not

retaliation.

202. Plaintiffs have a duty to mitigate any damages that may have resulted

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 28 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 29

from any alleged unlawful employment practices by Webb County. Plaintiffs’

damages, if any, should be reduced by any failure to mitigate damages as may be

shown by the evidence.

203. Webb County alleges that under Texas law, Plaintiffs were “at-will

employees” and Plaintiffs had no property interest in their jobs nor any continuing

right to employment.

204. Webb County alleges that, in the unlikely event the Plaintiffs prove

that their allegedly protected speech was a motivating factor in the employment

decisions made with respect to the Plaintiffs, Webb County will show that it would

have made the very same decisions in regards to the Plaintiffs’ employment

irrespective of the Plaintiffs’ allegedly protected speech.

205. Webb County asserts the right to add additional affirmative defenses

as they become apparent in the discovery of this case.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Webb County prays that this Court

(a) deny the relief and recovery sought by Plaintiffs, (b) enter a judgment in favor of

Webb County and (c) for such other relief to which it may be entitled.

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 29 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 30

Respectfully submitted,

GOODE CASSEB JONESRIKLIN CHOATE & WATSONA PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION2122 N. Main AvenueP.O. Box 120480San Antonio, Texas 78212-9680(210) 733-6030(210) 733-0330 (Facsimile)

By: /s/ Kyle C. Watson Kyle C. Watson

State Bar No. 20971100Southern Dist. of Texas No. 169339Charles E. BoothState Bar No. 24040545Southern Dist. of Texas No. 617016

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT WEBB COUNTY

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 30 of 31

Webb County’s Original Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint; 3998-013 Page 31

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, on December 15, 2008, I electronically filed theforegoing with the Clerk of the Court, and service on the following knownElectronic Filing User will be automatically accomplished through the Notice ofElectronic Filing from the Court:

Albert M Gutierrez, III Gutierrez Wymer, P.C. 7718 Broadway San Antonio, TX 78209

Albert Lopez Attorney at Law 14310 Northbrook Dr, Ste. 110San Antonio, TX 78232

Yohana Saucedo Attorney at Law 1618 Salinas Ave Laredo, TX 78040

Alberto AlarconHall, Quintanilla & Alarcon1302 Washington StreetLaredo, Texas 78042

By U.S. First Class Mail to the following:Murray Malakoff1715 N. Urbahn - Suite BLaredo, Texas 78043

/s/ Kyle C. Watson Kyle C. Watson

Case 5:08-cv-00128 Document 35 Filed in TXSD on 12/15/08 Page 31 of 31