Hogan v. Allstate Beverage Company, Inc.

Filing 91

OPINION AND ORDER directing that defendant Allstate Beverage Company, Inc.'s 70 and 77 motions to strike are denied, as further set out. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 12/4/12. (scn, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION FLOYD HOGAN, JR., et al., ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, v. ALLSTATE BEVERAGE COMPANY, INC., d/b/a Gulf Distributing, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:10cv390-MHT (WO) OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Allstate Beverage Company, Inc. has filed two motions to strike portions of affidavits submitted by plaintiff Floyd Hogan, Jr. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) applies only to pleadings: “The court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” to “strike” affidavits submitted immaterial, Allstate’s motions in connection with Hogan’s motion for conditional class certification, etc. is not a request to strike material from a pleading. Mann v. Darden, 2009 WL 2019588 (M.D. Ala. July 6, 2009). Nevertheless, in resolving Hogan’s motion, the court implicitly considered the motions to strike as, instead, objections to the evidence offered by Hogan. The court was capable of sifting through the evidence, as required by the class-certification process, without resort to an exclusionary process. *** Accordingly, it is ORDERED that defendant Allstate Beverage Company, Inc.’s motions to strike (Doc. Nos. 70 and 77) are denied. DONE, this the 4th day of December, 2012. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?