Black v. A Transport and Alamo/National Car Rental

Filing 51

MEMORANDUM Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 11/23/2009:Mailed notice(srn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION RICHARD BLACK, Plaintiff, v. A TRANSPORT COMPANY, INC., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No.

09 C 2780

MEMORANDUM ORDER A Transport Company, Inc. ("A Transport") has filed its Answer to the Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") brought against it by its ex-employee Richard Black ("Black"). This memorandum

order is issued sua sponte because of some problematic aspects of that responsive pleading. To begin, Answer ¶¶3, 5 and 11 involve partial or total invocation of the disclaimer provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 8(b)(5). Although those invocations are proper in form, That is of

what follows--"and therefore denies same"--is not.

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. As for A Transport's ADs, several call for revision or elimination entirely. 1. Here they are:

AD 2 is a brief assertion of the equivalent of a

Rule 12(b)(6) motion.

But A Transport had essayed a full-

blown Rule 12(b)(6) motion, together with a supporting memorandum of law, back in October--and this Court shot it down orally as ill-conceived back then. A Transport's

position has not improved with age or brevity, and AD 1 is stricken.1 2. AD 3 charges that Black's "claims are barred to the

extent that they occurred beyond the applicable statute of limitations." "To the extent" is a telltale tipoff that a

defendant has failed to comply with the notice pleading requirements that the federal system imposes on defendants as well as plaintiffs. If A Transport believes that it has

some statute of limitations problems with the SAC, those must be better particularized--and meanwhile AD 3 is stricken as well. 3. That is equally true of AD 4. It too is stricken.2

________________________________________ Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge Date: November 23, 2009

Indeed, that second attempt could well be viewed as an invitation to the imposition of a Rule 11(c) sanction, except that this Court is generally disinclined toward such measures. No comment is made either way as to A Transport's other asserted ADs. If Black's counsel sees problems there as well, he is free to assert them.
2

1