Obergefell et al v. Kasich et al

Filing 32

ANSWER to 24 Amended Complaint filed by Camille Jones. (Herzig, Aaron)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
James Obergefell, et al.,
Plaintiffs
v.
John Kasich, et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-501
Judge Timothy S. Black

DEFENDANT CITY OF
CINCINNATI VITAL STATISTICS
REGISTRAR CAMILLE JONES’
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’
AMENDED VERIFIED
COMPLAINT (DOC. 24)

ANSWER
For her Answer to Plaintiffs’ Amended Verified Complaint (Doc. 24)
(“Complaint”), Defendant Camille Jones, M.D. sued in her official capacity as the
City of Cincinnati’s local registrar of vital statistics (“City”), states as follows:
1.

Paragraph 1 of the Complaint is a preliminary statement of Plaintiffs’

case and does not contain allegations to which a response is required.
allegations are specifically answered in the paragraphs below.
2.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint.

3.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 3 of the Complaint.

4.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 4 of the Complaint.

5.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 5 of the Complaint.

6.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 6 of the Complaint.

7.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 7 of the Complaint.

Any

8.

With regard to Paragraph 8 of the Complaint, the City admits that Dr.

Jones is the local registrar of vital statistics for the City of Cincinnati and that she
is sued in her official capacity only. Dr. Jones’s duties and responsibilities as vital
statistics registrar are stated in Chapter 3705 of the Ohio Revised Code and the
administrative regulations promulgated by the Ohio Department of Health and the
state’s vital statistics registrar.

The City denies the remaining allegations of

Paragraph 8 of the Complaint to the extent they are inconsistent with this response.
9.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 9 of the Complaint.
10.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 10 of the Complaint.
11.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 11 of the Complaint.
12.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 12 of the Complaint.
13.

With regard to Paragraph 13 of the Complaint, the City admits that

Obergefell and Arthur were married in Maryland. The City lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations
in Paragraph 13 of the Complaint.
14.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 14 of the Complaint.
15.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 15 of the Complaint.

2

16.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 16 of the Complaint.
17.

With regard to Paragraph 17 of the Complaint, the City admits that

Ives died of natural causes at University Hospital on August 27, 2013. The City
lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about whether the death
was unexpected.
18.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 18 of the Complaint.
19.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 19 of the Complaint.
20.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 20 of the Complaint.

21.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 21 of the Complaint.

22.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 22 of the Complaint.

23.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 23 of the Complaint.

24.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 24 of the Complaint.

25.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 25 of the Complaint.

26.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 26 of the Complaint.

27.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 27 of the Complaint.

28.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 28 of the Complaint.

29.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 29 of the Complaint.

3

30.

The City denies the allegations in Paragraph 30 of the Complaint only

to the extent that it is required as a political subdivision of the state to defend the
constitution and laws of the state of Ohio. The laws at issue are state laws. The
City of Cincinnati does not have any municipal laws treating same-sex marriages
differently from opposite-sex marriages. Rather, the City of Cincinnati has shown
its support for same-sex couples. The City recently proclaimed July 11, 2013 as
“John Arthur and James Obergefell Day,” in recognition of the initial Plaintiffs’
marriage. The ceremonial proclamation states that “John and Jim are a shining
example of why LGB couples should be treated equally, under the law, in every
state.”

Additionally, the City last year extended health care benefits to permit

employees in committed same-sex relationships, among others, to enjoy the same
benefits as married couples.

Eight of nine Members of Council supported the

change. See, e.g., Cincinnati City Council Motion (Apr. 30, 2012) (Cincinnati Doc.
No. 201200663).

And in November 2004, Cincinnati voters amended the City

Charter to repeal Article XII, which had prohibited the City from giving legal
protections based on sexual orientation. See Cincinnati Ordinance No. 271-2004.
31.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 31 of the Complaint.
32.

The City lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 32 of the Complaint.
33.

With regard to Paragraph 33 of the Complaint, the City admits that

the City issued a death certificate for Michener’s death pursuant to a Temporary

4

Restraining Order entered by the Court (Doc. 23). The City lacks knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations
in Paragraph 33 of the Complaint.
34.

With regard to Paragraph 34 of the Complaint, the City admits that

Dr. Jones’s duties and responsibilities as vital statistics registrar are stated in
Chapter 3705 of the Ohio Revised Code and the administrative regulations
promulgated by the Ohio Department of Health and the state’s vital statistics
registrar.

The City denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 34 of the

Complaint to the extent they are inconsistent with this response.
35.

With regard to Paragraph 35 of the Complaint, the City admits that

Dr. Jones’s duties and responsibilities as vital statistics registrar are stated in
Chapter 3705 of the Ohio Revised Code and the administrative regulations
promulgated by the Ohio Department of Health and the state’s vital statistics
registrar. Dr. Jones is not required to and does not routinely check or investigate
claims of marital status related to requests for death certificates. Dr. Jones would
not knowingly permit a death certificate to be issued containing false information
about a decedent’s marital status. The City denies the remaining allegations of
Paragraph 35 of the Complaint to the extent they are inconsistent with this
response.
36.

With regard to Paragraph 36 of the Complaint, the City admits that

Dr. Jones’s duties and responsibilities as vital statistics registrar are stated in
Chapter 3705 of the Ohio Revised Code and the administrative regulations

5

promulgated by the Ohio Department of Health and the state’s vital statistics
registrar. Dr. Jones is not required to and does not routinely check or investigate
claims of marital status related to requests for death certificates. Dr. Jones would
not knowingly permit a death certificate to be issued containing false information
about a decedent’s marital status. The City denies the remaining allegations of
Paragraph 36 of the Complaint to the extent they are inconsistent with this
response.
37.

With regard to Paragraph 37 of the Complaint, the City admits that

the City issued a death certificate for Michener’s death pursuant to a Temporary
Restraining Order entered by the Court (Doc. 23).
38.

The City admits the allegations in Paragraph 38 of the Complaint.

39.

The City denies the allegations in Paragraph 39 of the Complaint.

40.

With regard to the Prayer for Relief in the Complaint, the City denies

that Plaintiffs are entitled to their reasonable costs, expenses, or attorney fees, or
any form of monetary relief from Dr. Jones or the City of Cincinnati.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
41.

The City denies each and every statement, allegation, and averment

contained in the Complaint that is not specifically admitted to be true.
42.

Plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

43.

Plaintiffs failed to mitigate damages, if any.

44.

The provisions of Chapter 2744 of the Ohio Revised Code bar some or

all of Plaintiffs’ claims.

6

45.

The City hereby gives notice that it intends to rely on and utilize any

affirmative defenses set forth in Rules 8 & 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure that may become available or apparent during the course of discovery
and hereby reserve the right to amend their answer to assert such defenses.
46.

The City reserves the right to raise any other defenses as shall become

manifest during or upon completion of discovery and hereby reserves the right to
amend its answer to assert such defenses.
Respectfully submitted,
JOHN P. CURP
City Solicitor
/s/ Aaron M. Herzig
Aaron M. Herzig (0079371)
Deputy City Solicitor
Terrance A. Nestor (0065840)
Assistant City Solicitor
Room 214, City Hall
801 Plum Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Ph.
[phone]
Fax.
[phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Trial Attorney for Defendant Camille
Jones, City of Cincinnati Registrar of
Vital Statistics

7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that the foregoing was filed on September 20, 2013, using the
Court’s CM/ECF system, which will deliver electronic notification of the filing to all
counsel of record.

/s/ Aaron M. Herzig

8