Currier v. Entergy Services, Inc. et al

Filing 50

ORDER denying 37 Motion to Strike 36 Response/Memorandum in Opposition to Motion. Signed by Judge Susie Morgan on 9/26/2013. (gbw, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ROSEANNE M. CURRIER,
Plaintiff

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

No. 11-2208

ENTERGY SERVICES, INC., et
al.
Defendants

Section “E”

ORDER
Before the Court is a motion to strike filed by Plaintiff Roseanne M. Currier, which
Defendant Steven F. Griffith, Jr. opposes.1 Counsel for Defendant is correct that, inasmuch
as Plaintiff seeks to strike material from a memorandum rather than a pleading, Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) provides no authority for the relief Plaintiff requests. See, e.g.,
Sunlight Saunas, Inc. v. Sundance Sauna, Inc., 427 F. Supp. 2d 1022, 1028–29 (D. Kan.
2006) (“Rule 12(f) authorizes the Court to strike material from pleadings. A brief in support
of a Daubert motion is not a pleading.”); Trujillo v. Bd. of Educ. of Albuquerque Pub. Schs.,
230 F.R.D. 657, 660 (D.N.M. 2005) (complaint, answer and reply constitute pleadings;
motions and other papers not pleadings).
Counsel for Defendant is, however, quite incorrect that her “argument was perfectly
appropriate.”2 While discussion of the case cited by Plaintiff was appropriate, the ad
hominem nature of the attack and rhetorical questions attacking the ethics of Plaintiff’s
counsel were not. Their inclusion is unfortunate, and counsel for Defendant owes counsel
1

R. Docs. Nos. 37, 45.

2

R. Doc. No. 45, p. 2.
1

for Plaintiff an apology.
Nevertheless,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to strike is DENIED.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this 26th day of September, 2013.

_____________________________
SUSIE MORGAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2