BERTRAM LAW OFFICE, L.L.C. 56 Fayette Street Bridgeton, New Jersey 08302 (856) 455-6000 ID # 014251997 Attorneys for Defendants James Curtis Edwards, Jack Surrency and City of Bridgeton

SUPERIOR COURT N CUMBERLAND

COUNTY

MAY 16 2017 RECD a FILED wss agAGemccA m,- OFFICE

: SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY . CUMBERLAND COUNTY : LAW DIVISION

THOMAS MARTIN, Plaintiff

:D OCKET NO. L-250-17 JAMES CURTIS EDWARDS, CITY OF : BRIDGETON; TRI-COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY, INC., : a/k/a GATEWAY COMMUNITY ACTION : CIVIL ACTION PARTNERSHIP; EASTERN PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT and JACK AMENDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT SURRENCY IN LIEU OF PREROGATIVE WRITS ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS, CITY OF BRIDGETON & JAMES CURTIS EDWARDS & JACK SURRENCY Defendants

The Answering Defendants, James Curtis Edwards, Jack Surrency and the City of Bridgeton, (hereinafter "Edwards," "Surrency" and "City" respectively, unless otherwise noted) by way of Answer to Plaintiff, Thomas Martin's Action, hereby respond as follows: 1. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or the allegations and therefore leave Plaintiff to his proofs. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted.

6. Admitted. 7. Admitted. 8. Admitted. 9. Admitted. 10. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. I I . Admitted that Edwards was a board member on March 7 but he has subsequently resigned. 12. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. 13. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. 14. Admitted. 15. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. 16. Admitted that defendant, James Curtis Edwards resigned as a board member of TriCounty Community Action Agency, Inc. ailda Gateway Community Action Partnership, denied this was done as a result of complaint filed by Plaintiff as the resignation predated the filing of the complaint. 17. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. 18. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. 19. Admitted. 20. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. 21. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. 22. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs.

2

23. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs as Bridgeton Municipal Port Authority (BMPA) has no involvement in River Grove Project. 24. Denied. 25. Denied. 26. This allegation does not call for a responsive answer. 27. This allegation does not call for a responsive answer. 28. This allegation is neither admitted nor denied and therefore leaves Plaintiff to his proofs. 29. Denied. 30.Denied. 31. Denied. WHEREFORE, Defendants. James Curtis Edwards, Jack Surrency and the City of Bridgeton respectfully request that the Action be dismissed with prejudice and that Answering Defendants be awarded costs of suit, reasonable counsel fees and such other and tlirther relief that the court deems equitable and just.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE All actions taken by the Answering Defendants with regard to Plaintiff were proper and done in accordance with applicable law.

3

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE One or more of Plaintiff's claims are barred by the doctrine of waiver and/or estoppel. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Answering Defendants performed each and every duty owed to Plaintiff. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Plaintiffs claims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. SIX AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Plaintiff' claims are barred by time constraints for filing a Complaint in Lieu of Prerogative Writ. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE This court lacks jurisdiction to hear Plaintiffs claims. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations.

WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that the Action be dismissed with prejudice and that answering Defendants be awarded costs of suit, reasonable counsel fees and such other and further relief that the Court deems equitable and just. BERTRAM LAW OFFICE, L.L.C. Attorneys for Answering Defendants City of Bridgeton, Jack Surrency, City Colin& band mes Curtis Edw t ouncil By: RE Dated: May 16, 2017

4

I A ...BERTRAM, ESQUIRE

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 4:5-1 1, Rebecca .1. Bertram, Esquire, attorney for the Defendants in the within action, hereby certify that: To the best of my knowledge, that matter in controversy is not the subject of another pending or contemplated court action or arbitration and that no other parties should be joined in this action. BERTRAM LAW OFFICE, L.L.C. Attorneys for Answering Defendants City of Bridgeton, Jack Surrency, City Council and James Curtis Edwards, City Council

Dated: May l6, 2017

By: R B = CA . BERTRAM, ESQUIRE

NOTICE OF TRIAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO R. 4:25-4, Rebecca J. Bertram, Esquire of the firm of Bertram Law Office, L.L.C. is designated as trial counsel for the Answering Defendants.

BERTRAM LAW OFFICE, L.L.C. Attorneys for Answering Defendants City of Bridgeton, Jack Surrency, City Council and James Curtis Edwards, City Council

Dated: May 16, 2017

By: R 7B CA J. BERTRAM, ESQUIRE

5

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 1:38-7 I certify that confidential personal identifiers have been redacted from documents now submitted to the Court, and will be redacted from all documents submitted in the future in accordance with Rule 1:38-7(b).

BERTRAM LAW OFFICE, L.L.C. Attorneys for Answering Defendants City of Bridgeton, Jack Surrency, City Council and James Curtis Edwards, City Council

Dated: May 16, 2017

By: R -B C' . BERTRAM, ESQUIRE

6