Is it better to include as many affirmative defenses as I can find, or to just use the ones I think apply to my case & reserve the right to plead other affirmative defenses that may become applicable or available at a later time?
No, affirmative defenses do not need to be written in legalese. In fact, using simple English is preferred. The defenses should make sense to you. Otherwise, don't use them.
You should not throw in a zillion affirmative defenses which do no apply to your specific lawsuit. Only assert the specific affirmative defenses which are applicable. Otherwise, you may be asked in written discovery to provide facts, witnesses and documents in support of each and every affirmative defense.
Although many attorneys in their answer "reserve" the right to add additional affirmative defenses, in reality, doing so makes absolutely no difference because a defendant would still need to obtain a stipulation or leave of court to amend an answer.
http://www.attorneyqna.com/legal-guides/ugc/litigation...
I agree with the other attorneys - when pleading, less is more. In Calfornia, all you need to do is place your opposition on reasonable notice of any defense potentially applicable to the case upon which you may rely. This does not require any magic words or legalese, just those facts and allegations demonstrating the applicability of a potential affirmative defense.
As for pleading many affirmative defenses, if you have a good faith belief that a defense may apply, plead it. Otherwise, leave it out.
There is no special language or "legalese: which is necessary. I would be complicated to add affirmative defenses you know or suspect to exist now at a later date. On the other hand, form interrogatories provide that you must provide the factual basis for every affirmative defense that you raise. If this is the collection matter from San Diego, you might consider and reconsider Ms. Koslyn's advice in your other posting.
