Pick & Zabicki LLP v Wu  2017 NY Slip Op 30687(U)  April 4, 2017  Supreme Court, New York County  Docket Number: 155702/2016  Judge: Gerald Lebovits is interesting because, although a generic attorney-fee claim with generic defenses, it is a very complete generic listing.  So, read this case for the long discussion of 20 affirmative defenses and 4 potential counterclaims.  It is a road-map to the standards of each.

“Defendant’s answer raises the following defenses and/or affirmative defenses, numbered 1 through 20: (I) failure to state a cause of action, but plaintiff does not move to dismiss this defense; (2) unclean hands and/or in pari delecto; (3) lack of capacity to sue; ( 4) lack of standing to sue; (5) claim is barred or, in the alternative, plaintiffs damages are the result of its own breach of fiduciary duty, breach of certain agreements, and failure to complete the performance required; (6) lack of damages, or that the damages are inconsequential and de minimis; (7) failure to mitigate; (8) claims were not filed within the applicable statutes of limitations and/or administrative filling periods; (9) plaintiff failed timely and properly to exhaust all necessary administrative, statutory, and/or jurisdictional prerequisites to commence this action; (I 0) waiver and estoppel; (I I) !aches; (12) plaintiff failed to comply with its obligations under the agreement; (13) claims are barred in whole or in part by the existence of the agreement which sets forth the only representation on which the parties were entitled to rely, as well as the parties’ rights and obligations with respect to each other; (14) defendant’s performance was excused, and defendant would have performed its obligations under the contract but for plaintiffs interference with defendant’s ability to perform, to the extent that defendant is found in breach of the contract; (15) insufficiency of service of process; (16) invalid service of process; (17) defendant does not owe the alleged debt and demands proof of the debt and damages plaintiff claims under the alleged contract; (18) lack of capacity to maintain or defend an action in the courts of the State of New York because plaintiff is unlicensed to do business in the State of New York; (19) “[p ]laintiff presented the [ d]efendant a forged contract with his name”; and (20) the purported contract is a fraud because the defendant was absent when it was executed. ”

“Defendant submits a proposed Verified Counterclaim, which includes the following counterclaims:(!) breach of fiduciary duty; (2) legal malpractice; (3) unjust enrichment; and (4) fraud. ”

“Accordingly, it is ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to dismiss the second through the twentieth defenses and/or affirmative defenses is granted; and it is further ORDERED that defendant’s cross-motion to interpose counterclaims is denied; and it is further “