PATNER

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 11/17/2010:Mailed notice(srn, )

Patner v. Associated Banc-Corp.

Doc. 12

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION STEVE PATNER, Plaintiff, v. ASSOCIATED BANC-CORP., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 10 C 5781

MEMORANDUM ORDER Immediately after issuance of this Court's October 29, 2010 memorandum order ("Order"), Associated Banc-Corp. ("Associated") filed an Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses ("AD") to the Complaint brought against it by its ex-employee Steve Patner. Although Associated's counsel has cured virtually all of the flaws identified in the Order,1 the handling of the ADs still leaves something to be desired: 1. AD ¶20, the essential equivalent of a Fed.R.Civ.P.

("Rule") 12(b)(6) motion, cannot be advanced in the objective and subjective good faith required of every party and every party's lawyer by Rule 11(b). That AD cannot be

proffered without contradicting the Complaint's allegations (an impermissible stance for an AD). 2. It is stricken.

Nothing in the Complaint even hints at an age

This Court expresses no view as to the substance of Associated's response -- only technical matters have been addressed in the Order and here.

1

Dockets.Justia.com

discrimination claim, so that AD ¶21 impermissibly raises a strawman. It too is stricken.

_________________________________ Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge Date: November 17, 2010

2