Woods v. Southwest Airlines

Filing 20

MEMORANDUM Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 12/15/2008:Mailed notice(srn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION DIANITA WOODS, Plaintiff, v. SOUTHWEST AIRLINES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No.

08 C 5201

MEMORANDUM ORDER Southwest Airlines Co. ("Southwest") has filed its Answer to the employment discrimination Complaint brought against it by its ex-employee Dianita Woods ("Woods"). This memorandum order is

issued sua sponte to correct two problematic--though concededly minor--aspects of that responsive pleading. For one thing, Answer ¶¶6 and 18 spoil otherwise immaculate disclaimers proffered pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 8(b)(5) by going on to say "and, therefore, denies same." 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 each of those paragraphs of the Answer. Secondly, two paragraphs of that responsive pleading--Answer ¶¶9 and 10--follow direct responses to Woods' corresponding allegations with a statement that "Southwest denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph --." But such denials make it unclear

whether Southwest is or is not challenging Woods' allegations that she satisfied the administrative prerequisites to bringing this action, as Southwest appears to acknowledge by its earlier admissions in those same paragraphs. Hence unless Southwest

files an amendment to its Answer on or before December 24, 2008 clarifying its position on that score, the earlier-quoted statement will be stricken from each paragraph.

________________________________________ Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge Date: December 15, 2008

2