California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Brown v. Scott, B240426 (Cal. App. 2013):
Defendants contend that an affirmative defense under section 1941.3 was unnecessary because the general denial in their answer was sufficient to put the defense at issue. An affirmative defense asserts new facts or legal issues that were not in issue under a general denial and, therefore, is not a proper ground for a defendant's motion for summary judgment unless it has been alleged. (Kendall v. Walker (2009) 181 Cal.App.4th 584, 598.) An affirmative defense alleges that even if the allegations in the complaint are true, defendants are not liable, whereas a general denial alleges the complaint is untrue. (See FPI Development, supra, 231 Cal.App.3d at pp. 383-384.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.