WWE Hall of Famer Jeff Jarrett filed a response earlier today to the counter-lawsuit brought against him and his company, Global Force Entertainment, by IMPACT Wrestling’s parent company Anthem last month in the United States District Court of The Middle District of Tennessee, according to a report from PWInsider.com.

The report notes that in today’s filing, Jarrett repeatedly denied that Anthem was due any relief for damages on his part and denied Anthem’s claims that he had entered into a $292,000 agreement with Kevin Sullivan and his company KSTV, LLC to handle all the post-production work needed on the GFW Amped! material, as well as the fact that Jarrett did not have the money to pay KSTV, LLC for the Global Force Wrestling content, leaving KSTV, LLC in a position where they were withholding the delivery of the GFW Amped! content. Anthem, in their latest counter-suit, claimed that they paid $40,000 towards an installment plan with KSTV, LLC in order to get the Global Force Wrestling footage released, so that post-production could be completed and used and stated that Jarrett was made Chief Creative Officer of Anthem Wrestling effective April of 2017 and given authority over its wrestling operations and the content that the company would create, market and sell under his watch as the CCO and that the post-production work on the Amped! content was completed and packaged as five different pay-per-view broadcasts and marketed with both the GFW and IMPACT trademarks.

Jarrett in his response stated, “Mr. Jarrett lacks sufficient knowledge to admit or deny whether Anthem Wrestling made any payment to KSTV or the reason for any payment. Mr. Jarrett denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 14”. Jarrett, while responding to a claim that he was unjustly enriched by Anthem’s payment to KSTV, LLC responded with the following, “Mr. Jarrett lacks sufficient knowledge to admit or deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 32. Mr. Jarrett admits that the payment served to obtain the release of the GFW Amped Content. Mr. Jarrett denies the remaining allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 32. Mr. Jarrett denies that Anthem Wrestling it entitled to any relief”.

The report states that Jarrett also denied that any usage of the terms “GFW” and “Global Force Wrestling” were authorized and claimed that he did not have the knowledge as to whether the sale and marketing of the GFW Amped! content was not successful and did not turn a profit, something Anthem previously claimed did not turn a profit. Jarrett also denied the following claim, “Almost all of Mr. Jarrett’s claims arise out of conduct he personally authorized and oversaw during his tenure as Chief Creative Officer of Anthem Wrestling, a post he officially held from April to October of 2017, but performed as a consultant since January of 2017. As Anthem’s Chief Creative Officer, Mr. Jarrett gave both express and implied permission for Anthem Wrestling to use the Amped Content, the Plaintiffs’ trademarks, and Jarrett’s own image and likeness (collectively the “Jarrett Intellectual Property”) as described in the Second Amended Complaint. Moreover, while acting as Anthem Wrestling’s Chief Content Officer, Jarrett participated in and authorized the selection of the trademark GLOBAL WRESTLING NETWORK for use by Anthem Wrestling”. Jarrett also claimed to lack sufficient knowledge as to whether the following allegation was true, “Jarrett knew that Anthem Wrestling would rely on his representations that it had the right to use all of the Jarrett Intellectual Property”.

Jarrett, in today’s filing, asked that Anthem’s counterclaims be dismissed “for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, that their claim of Breach of Duty of Loyalty and their counterclaim of Breach of Fiduciary Duty should each be dismissed because the Term Sheet describes the terms under which Plaintiffs’ intellectual property assets would be licensed to Anthem Wrestling, that relief requested as against Mr. Jarrett is barred because no action or omission by Mr. Jarrett caused Anthem Wrestling injury, that their counterclaims are by virtue of its own acts, omissions and conduct, estopped, that any equitable relief sought by Anthem Wrestling is barred by unclean hands and that Anthem lacked standing to bring the counter-claims”.