Kincaid v. Messina
Filing
19
MEMORANDUM Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 4/26/2012:Mailed notice(srn, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
SHERRICE D. KINCAID, etc.,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
POLICE OFFICER DAN MESSINA,
et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No.
12 C 600
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This action was initially brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§§1983 and 1981 to charge a violation of the constitutional
rights of a 17-year-old woman by Villa Park Police Officer Dan
Messina (“Messina”).
Its four-page Complaint conformed admirably
to the dictate of Fed. R. Civ. P. (“Rule”) 8(a)(2) that calls for
“a short and plain statement of the claim.”
Plaintiff’s counsel then sought and was granted leave to
file an Amended Complaint--but regrettably that new pleading,
filed on April 13, has turned out to be a misguided effort.
Quite apart from the all-too-common practice of employing
different counts to splinter a single claim in terms of various
different legal theories (see NAACP v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co.,
978 F.2d 287, 291-93 (7th Cir. 1992)),1 plaintiff’s counsel
has--for no apparent reason at all--repeated the same allegations
1
No one seems to read and comply with the literal language
of Rule 10(b) any more.
in every one of the counts rather than employing incorporation by
reference.
That, coupled with the present assertion of no fewer
than seven theories of recovery in as many counts, has caused the
Amended Complaint to balloon to more than 20 pages, when more
sensible drafting would have occupied only one-third to one-half
that number.
Just as importantly, it is a discourtesy to
opposing counsel to have to repeat the same responses over and
over, when once again a judicious use of incorporation by
reference would do the job.
Accordingly the Amended Complaint is stricken, but with
leave granted to file a Second Amended Complaint on or before
May 11, 2012.
But Messina and the Village of Villa Park (the
latter having been added as a defendant in the Amended Complaint)
are ordered to answer or otherwise plead to the Second Amended
Complaint within 14 days after receipt of that new pleading.
________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date:
April 26, 2012
2
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?