Lobacz v. City Of Chicago
Filing
16
MEMORANDUM Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 4/22/2013. Mailed notice by judge's staff. (srb,)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
NICHOLAS LOBACZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No.
13 C 1777
MEMORANDUM ORDER
This Court’s brief April 16, 2013 memorandum order called
for further input from the litigants to enable it to address, on
an informed basis, the motion by the City of Chicago (“City”) to
dismiss Complaint Count III at the time of the April 25
presentment date that City had designated.
Plaintiff Nicholas
Lobacz (“Lobacz”) has responded by his April 19 filing of a
Verified Amended Complaint (“AC”), the allegations of which must
be accepted as true for Fed. R. Civ. P. (“Rule”) 12(b)(6)
purposes.
AC ¶20 has changed Lobacz’s stated date of receipt of EEOC’s
right-to-sue letter, the precondition to suit under Count III, to
“on or after November 5, 2012.”
On that basis Lobacz got in just
under the wire with his Americans with Disabilities Act claim set
out in Count III:
February 2, 2013 (a Saturday) was the 90th day
after November 5, 2012, so that Lobacz’s filing of suit in the
Circuit Court of Cook County on Monday, February 4 was timely.
Although City’s motion to dismiss the original Complaint’s
Count III has been rendered moot by Lobacz’s filing of the AC,
any attempted renewal of that motion would be futile in light of
what has been said here.
Accordingly City is ordered to file its
Answer to the AC on or before May 6, 2013.
Counsel for the
parties are nevertheless expected to appear on the April 25
presentment date to discuss the nature and scheduling of further
proceedings.
________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date:
April 22, 2013
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?