IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
April 7, 2010
ZACHARY A. MCGRAW JR., PLAINTIFF,
CITY OF CHICAGO, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge
City of Chicago ("City") had noticed up, for presentment on April 12, its motion seeking a week's additional time to answer the pro se employment discrimination Complaint brought against it by Zachary McGraw Jr. ("McGraw"). Because McGraw then confirmed that he had no objection to that brief extension, this Court has granted City's motion without requiring either party to appear.
In the meantime McGraw has just tendered for filing a handwritten document headed "Status Hearing Amended Complaint," coupled with some attached exhibits. That document was both unbidden and unauthorized, so that this Court would be well within its area of discretion if it simply returned those papers to McGraw without filing. After all, even though pro se litigants are entitled to have their pleadings viewed through a generous lens (Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972)(per curiam)), that does not entitle them to depart from the fundamental principles of pleading--in this instance, seeking leave of court before filing.
At the same time, it is possible that some of the things that McGraw has now sought to add to the mix (whether in his narrative or in the attached exhibits) may be of use to City in connection with its forthcoming response. If so, it is free to refer to those things--although it should be made clear that its Answer is to be directed toward the allegations in McGraw's original Complaint as limited by this Court's March 10 ruling on City's then-filed motion to dismiss. When City's responsive pleading is in hand, this Court will be better able to determine whether or not McGraw's current submission should indeed be filed.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.