IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
January 16, 2007
MICHAEL ZACCARO, ET AL., ETC., PLAINTIFFS,
DWIGHT ARANT, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge
Michael Zaccaro ("Zaccaro") has filed a motion before this Court's colleague Honorable Joan Gottschall "to consolidate this case" (more accurately, to reassign it on relatedness grounds to her calendar) in conjunction with Case No. 05 C 6483, now pending before Judge Gottschall. That motion has been continued for hearing by Judge Gottschall to 9:30 a.m. January 18, 2007.
In the meantime, however, defendant Dwight Arant ("Arant") has filed what he labels as his pro se Answer to the Complaint in this action. This brief memorandum order is issued because in doing so Arant has ignored some basic pleading rules: the requirements that a defending party (1) must replicate (or summarize) each paragraph in the complaint before stating his, her or its response (see this District Court's LR 10.1), (2) must respond to each of the complaint's allegations by an admission or denial (see the first sentence of Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 8(b)) or by a disclaimer conforming to the second sentence of Rule 8(b) and (3) must state any defenses to the complaint "in short and plain terms" (again see the first sentence of Rule 8(b)).
Accordingly Arant's present Answer is stricken. This ruling is of course issued without prejudice to Arant's filing of an amended Answer conforming to the applicable pleading rules on or before January 29, 2007.
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.