Riffel Law Firm PLLC v. Gaisford et al, No. 5:2020cv00616 - Document 49 (W.D. Okla. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 42 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Honorable Robin J. Cauthron on 02/02/21. (wh)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Riffel Law Firm PLLC v. Gaisford et al Doc. 49 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA RIFFEL LAW FIRM, PLLC, a Professional Limited Liability Company, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) HEATH D. GAISFORD, an individual; ) ALISHA LOUISE GAISFORD, an ) individual; DENNIS IRVIN GAISFORD, ) an individual; LOLA FAYE GAISFORD, ) an individual; STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ) ex rel. OKLAHOMA TAX ) COMMISSION; ELLIS COUNTY ) TREASURER and BOARD OF COUNTY ) COMMISSIONERS; U.S. DEPARTMENT ) OF AGRICULTURE, ex rel. FARM ) SERVICE AGENCY; and JOHN DOE, ) occupant, ) ) Defendants, ) ) HEATH D. GAISFORD, an individual; ) ALISHA LOUISE GAISFORD, an ) individual; DENNIS IRVIN GAISFORD, ) an individual; and LOLA FAYE ) GAISFORD, an individual, ) ) Counterclaim Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) RIFFEL LAW FIRM, PLLC, a ) Professional Limited Liability Company, ) CRAIG RIFFEL, an individual; ) KATRESA RIFFEL, an individual; and ) JONATHAN F. BENHAM, an individual, ) ) Counterclaim Defendants. ) No. CIV-20-616-C Dockets.Justia.com MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Counter-Defendants Riffel Law Firm, PLLC, Craig Riffel, Katresa Riffel, and Jonathan Benham (“Counter-Defendants”) have filed a Motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) seeking dismissal of the counterclaims alleged against them. According to Counter-Defendants, the allegations in the Amended Counterclaim fail to state a claim for relief. After consideration of the allegations in Counter-Defendants’ Motion the Court finds it should be denied. The claims in the Amended Counterclaim could have been more artfully drafted or could have offered additional factual details. Nevertheless, even in their present state, the allegations state a plausible claim for relief. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009). Additionally, to the extent the Motion seeks dismissal of the claims against Katresa Riffel, Counter-Defendants’ Motion seeks resolution of a factual dispute. Of course, that action is improper at this stage. As set forth more fully herein, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Gaisford Defendants’ Amended Counterclaims (Dkt. No. 42) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of February 2021. 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
