IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
May 23, 2012
CHERISSA JOHNSON, ADMINISTRATOR, ETC., PLAINTIFF,
BOBBY E. WRIGHT COMPREHENSIVE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER, INC., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge
Bobby E. Wright Comprehensive Behavioral Health Center, Inc. ("Wright") has filed its Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Amended Complaint brought against it by the Administrator of the Estate of its ex-employee Michael Johnson. This sua sponte memorandum order is prompted by aspects of that responsive pleading that, though perhaps imaginative, play no proper role in federal pleading.
To begin with, at several points Wright's counsel begins its response to an allegation by stating "Objection: Argumentative" or "Objection: Legal Conclusion." Those components of the Answer are unauthorized by Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 8(b), and each is stricken.
Next, Answer ¶38 follows a proper (technically proper, that is) disclaimer under Rule 8(b)(5) by adding "and therefore denies the allegations of paragraph 38 of the Amended Complaint." 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 the quoted phrase is stricken from that paragraph of the Answer.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.