IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
March 15, 2011
MICHAEL JOHNSON, PLAINTIFF,
GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge
Graybar Electric Company, Inc. ("Graybar") has filed its Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Complaint brought against it by its ex-employee Michael Johnson. This memorandum order is issued sua sponte to require Graybar's counsel to correct one aspect of that pleading.
Answer ¶¶10 and 13 fail to follow the plain roadmap marked out by Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 8(b)(5)--see App'x ¶1 to State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Riley, 199 F.R.D. 276, 278 (N.D. Ill. 2001). Moreover, those same paragraphs impermissibly go on to deny the allegations that are the subject of Graybar's imperfect disclaimers. That is of course oxymoronic--how can a party that asserts (presumably in good faith) that it lacks even enough information to form a belief as to the truth of an allegation then proceed to deny it in accordance with Rule 11(b)?
Accordingly Answer ¶¶10 and 13 are stricken. Leave is granted to file properly amended Answer ¶¶10 and 13 (not a full Amended Answer) on or before March 28, 2011.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.