Haygood v. Kambli et al

Filing 27

OPINION AND ORDER DEEMING MOOT 12 MOTION for More Definite Statement by Defendants Peter Buttigieg, Shubhada Kambli, South Bend Indiana City of. Signed by Judge William C Lee on 3/12/15. (cer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
BRIAN HAYGOOD,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND,
Defendant.

CIVIL NO. 3:14cv1934

OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on a Motion for More Definite Statement, filed by the
defendant on November 25, 2014. Plaintiff filed a response on January 14, 2015, to which the
defendant replied on February 3, 2014.
For the following reasons, the motion will be deemed moot.
Discussion
Defendant’s motion for more definite statement requests the court to order Plaintiff to
clarify whether his respondeat superior claim is an independent tort claim or whether it is a part
of his ADEA claim.
On February 6, 2015, this court entered an Order granting Defendant’s motion for partial
dismissal. In this Order, Plaintiff was ordered to amend the caption in his complaint such that
the City of South Bend is the sole party. Additionally, Plaintiff’s ADEA claim was dismissed to
the extent it sought damages against individual defendants, and Counts II (negligent hiring) and
III (violation of wage payment statute) were completely dismissed.
On March 3, 2015, in response to the court order, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended
Complaint. This complaint consists of one count, which alleges violations of the ADEA. As the
Second Amended Complaint clarifies the respondeat superior issue, the motion for more definite

statement is now moot.
Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, defendant’s motion for more definite statement [DE 12] is
hereby DEEMED MOOT.

Entered: March 12, 2015.

s/ William C. Lee
William C. Lee, Judge
United States District Court

2