O'Bryan v. Postrack Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 44

MEMORANDUM Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 12/17/2012:Mailed notice(srn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
POSTRACK TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
)
DONALD HEIDRICH, MARK AUBRY,
)
WILLIAM WASHBURN and STEVEN
)
GONZALO,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________________ )
)
POSTRACK TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
)
)
Counter-Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
MICHELE F. O'BRYAN and DOUGLAS
)
SPITZ,
)
)
Counter and
)
Third-Party Defendants. )
MICHELE F. O'BRYAN,

Case No. 12 C 5305

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Michele O'Bryan ("O'Bryan") has filed her Answer plus an affirmative defense to the
Counterclaims brought against her in this action. This memorandum order is issued sua sponte
to address one problematic aspect of that responsive pleading.
In each of Answer ¶¶3, 13 and 22 O'Bryan's counsel has coupled a denial with a
disjunctive disclaimer under Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 8(b)(5) as to certain allegations of the
Counterclaims. Although federal practice does permit some internally inconsistent pleading

under appropriate circumstances, what has been attempted here is not one of them.
Accordingly each of those hybrid assertions is stricken. O'Bryan is granted until
December 27, 2012 to choose which of those two inconsistent alternatives should be asserted in
the three paragraphs referred to above, in compliance with the subjective and objective good faith
demanded by Rule 11(b).

__________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: December 17, 2012

-2-