IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
December 6, 2006
PHYLLIS MEDINA, ETC., PLAINTIFF,
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, ETC., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge
Boston Scientific Miami Corporation ("Boston Scientific") has filed its Answer to the two-count product liability action brought against it by Phyllis Medina, as Special Administrator of the Estate of decedent Dorothy Hraback. This memorandum order is issued sua sponte to correct two errors in that responsive pleading.
First, Answer Count I ¶¶1, 2, 3 and 6 follow Boston Scientific's literal--and proper--compliance with the disclaimer provision of the second sentence of Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 8(b) with statements that it "on that basis, denies the same." That is of course an oxymoron, for there is no way in which a party that lacks enough information to form a belief as to the truth of a plaintiff's allegations can then go on to deny those allegations in objective good faith. Accordingly those quoted statements are stricken from all of the cited paragraphs.
As for the other problematic response, Answer Count II ¶4 is really a nonresponse--how is the reader (whether plaintiff's counsel, this Court or anyone else) supposed to guess at what defense counsel believes are "only those duties that may be imposed upon [defendant] by law"? That paragraph of the Answer is therefore stricken, and defense counsel is ordered to file a proper response to the corresponding Complaint allegation on or before December 15, 2006, failing which the allegation will be deemed to have been admitted.
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.