Grace v. Louisiana Housing Finance Agency

Filing 14

ORDER: as to 8 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Louisiana Housing Finance Agency. IT IS ORDERED that defendant, Louisiana Housing Finance Agency, shall address pltf's defamation and unethical business practices claims w ithin the deadline previously set for its reply memorandum, or if such deadline cannot be met, shall address such claims in a supplemental memorandum filed within twenty (20) days of this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent pltf finds it necessary to respond to the LHFAs arguments concerning her defamation and unethical business practices claims, she may do so within ten (10) days of the filing of LHFAs reply/supplemental reply memorandum regarding those claims.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christine Noland on 2/21/2012. (CMM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
KELLEY GRACE

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS
LOUISIANA HOUSING
FINANCE AGENCY

NO. 11-752-FJP-CN

ORDER
In considering the Motion to Dismiss (R. Doc. 8) filed by defendant, the State of
Louisiana, through the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency (“LHFA”), in which LHFA
contends that plaintiff’s case should be dismissed in its entirety, it has come to the Court’s
attention that LHFA has not discussed two (2) of the claims asserted in the attachment to
plaintiff’s complaint, which attachment is allowed to be considered when deciding a motion
to dismiss.1 Specifically, LHFA failed to address plaintiff’s claims of defamation and of
unethical business practices. In order to fully evaluate LHFA’s assertion that plaintiff’s case
should be dismissed in its entirety, it would be of benefit to the Court to have LHFA address
those two (2) claims. In the event LHFA is able to include those arguments within the
deadline for its reply memorandum previously set by the Court, it should do so. However,
to the extent it cannot address those claims within the reply memorandum deadline, LHFA
shall file a supplemental reply memorandum within twenty (20) days of this Order
addressing those two (2) claims. If plaintiff deems a response to such additional arguments
by LHFA to be necessary, she shall file such response to LHFA’s reply/supplemental reply
memorandum within ten (10) days of the filing of LHFA’s memorandum addressing the two
1

“In deciding a motion to dismiss, the court may consider documents attached to or incorporated
in the complaint and matters of which judicial notice may be taken.” Fairley v. Stalder, 2008 WL 3244022
(5th Cir. 2008), quoting Willard v. Humana Health Plan of Tex., 336 F.3d 375 (5th Cir. 2003).

(2) claims.
Accordingly;
IT IS ORDERED that defendant, Louisiana Housing Finance Agency, shall address
plaintiff’s defamation and unethical business practices claims within the deadline previously
set for its reply memorandum, or if such deadline cannot be met, shall address such claims
in a supplemental memorandum filed within twenty (20) days of this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent plaintiff finds it necessary to respond
to the LHFA’s arguments concerning her defamation and unethical business practices
claims, she may do so within ten (10) days of the filing of LHFA’s reply/supplemental reply
memorandum regarding those claims.
Signed in chambers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, February 21, 2012.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHRISTINE NOLAND