Tollen v. El Dorado, Kansas, City of

Filing 15

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 6 plaintiff's Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses. Signed by District Judge John W. Lungstrum on 10/5/2011. (ses)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Erick P. Tollen,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 11-1182-JWL

City of El Dorado, Kansas,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff filed this suit against defendant asserting a claim under the Americans with
Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and a state law claim of retaliatory discharge. This
matter is presently before the court on plaintiff’s motion to strike certain affirmative defenses
(doc. 6). As will be explained, the motion is denied.
Plaintiff moves the court to strike certain affirmative defenses pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 12(f) on the basis that they do not comply with the pleading standards set
forth by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corporation v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007).
Defendant, in response, urges that the pleading standards set forth in Twombly do not apply to
affirmative defenses. Since the filing of plaintiff’s motion and defendant’s response to that
motion,1 the court has resolved this precise issue in another case and, in doing so, has addressed
the arguments asserted by the parties here. See Unicredit Bank AG v. Bucheli, 2011 WL
4036466, at *4-6 (D. Kan. Sept. 12, 2011). In that case, this court concluded that Twombly

1

Plaintiff did not file a reply to the response.

standards should not apply to affirmative defenses. For the reasons set forth in full in that
opinion, the court declines to apply Twombly to the affirmative defenses challenged by plaintiff
here. The motion is denied.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT THAT plaintiff’s motion to strike
affirmative defenses (doc. 6) is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated this 5th day of October, 2011, at Kansas City, Kansas.

s/ John W. Lungstrum
John W. Lungstrum
United States District Judge

2