Clukey v. City of Charlotte, NC

Filing 10

ORDER denying 4 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by District Judge Frank D. Whitney on 3/16/2009. (klg)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:09-cv-45-FDW ANNE MARIE CLUKEY, Plaintiff, vs. CITY OF CHARLOTTE, NC, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER THIS MATTER comes now before the Court upon Defendant's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Doc. No. 4). Having considered the serious allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint, the Court believes that the determination of the legal sufficiency of Plaintiff's claims should be deferred until the next dispositive stage of litigation. See Flue-Cured Tobacco Co-op. Stabilization Corp. v. U.S. EPA, 857 F. Supp. 1137, 1145 (M.D.N.C. 1994) ("This claim can be adjudicated more accurately after the parties have developed the factual record."); Initial Scheduling Order, 3:07-MC-47 (Doc. No. 2) at 3(c)(2) ("[T]he Court may elect to defer ruling on issues raised in Rule 12 and similar motions until the close of discovery."). Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. The Court will revisit the merits of Plaintiff's allegations at the conclusion of discovery, on either a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings or Rule 56 motion for summary judgment. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed: March 16, 2009

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?