Bonner v. Washington et al
Filing
51
OPINION AND ORDER denying 50 Plaintiff's Disagree with Magistrate Judge to Strike Plaintiff Reply Motion to Defendant's Response. The Court ADVISES that documents that seek relief are motions and should be titled as motions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul R Cherry on 12/2/15. (cc: Plaintiff)(ksp)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
HAMMOND DIVISION
VERNON BONNER,
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
)
GENERAL INFORMATION SERVICES, )
Defendant.
)
CAUSE NO.: 2:14-CV-318-RLM-PRC
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Disagree with Magistrate Judge to Strike
Plaintiff Reply Motion to Defendant’s Response [DE 50], filed by Plaintiff Vernon Bonner, pro se.
The Court construes this filing as a motion to reconsider its order striking Plaintiff’s Reply to
Defendant Answer to Complaint, which the Court made orally on the record at a pretrial conference
on November 19, 2015.
Pleadings, which state a party’s claims or defenses, are governed by Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 7(a). This rule provides that only certain pleadings are allowed, among them a complaint
and an answer to a complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a)(1)-(2). A reply to an answer, however, is a form
of pleading allowed only if the Court orders one to be filed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a)(7). The filing that
the Court struck was Plaintiff’s reply to the answer, and the Court did not order this reply. It is the
Court’s duty to ensure compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, so it was proper for
the Court to act on its own without a request from Defendant to strike the filing. See Controlled
Env’t Sys. v. Sun Process Co., Inc., 173 F.R.D. 509, 510 (N.D. Ill. 1997).
In contrast to pleadings, motions are documents that seek relief by requesting court orders.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b). Unlike the procedure with pleadings, when a motion is filed and the nonmoving
party files a response, it is appropriate for the moving party to file a reply without first receiving the
Court’s permission.
Accordingly, the Court hereby DENIES Plaintiff’s Disagree with Magistrate Judge to Strike
Plaintiff Reply Motion to Defendant’s Response [DE 50].
As a further matter, the Court notes that the instant document, though it seeks relief from the
Court, is not titled as a motion. The Court hereby ADVISES that documents that seek relief are
motions and should be titled as motions.
SO ORDERED this 2nd day of December, 2015.
s/ Paul R. Cherry
MAGISTRATE JUDGE PAUL R. CHERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
cc:
Plaintiff Vernon Bonner, pro se
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?