Millard County Tax Payers for Responsible Government v. Waddingham et al
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - granting in part and denying in part 28 Motion to Strike Allegations in the Second 27 Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 10/21/13. (ss)
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
MILLARD COUNTY TAX PAYERS FOR
RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT, LLC;
MELANIE A. SLAVENS, individually and as
Special Administrator of the Estate of James
Kenneth Slavens (aka James K. Slavens),
and; JOHN/JANE DOES A through Z,
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’
RULE 12(f) MOTION TO STRIKE
RICHARD T. WADDINGHAM, individually
and in his official capacity as Millard County
Attorney; WADDINGHAM & ASSOC, P.C.,
and; JOHN/JANE DOES 1-10,
Case No. 2:13-CV-329 TS
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Rule 12(f) Motion to Strike Allegations in
the Second Amended Complaint. Defendants seek to strike Paragraphs 134 through 140 and 155
through 160 of Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint. For the reasons discussed below, the
Court will grant the Motion in part and deny it in part.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f) provides that “[t]he court may strike from a pleading an insufficient
defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” Motions to Strike
under Rule 12(f) are viewed with disfavor by the federal courts and are infrequently granted.1
Having reviewed the paragraphs at issue, the Court finds that, with the exception of the
final two sentences of Paragraph 155, they are not redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or
scandalous. Therefore, the Court will largely deny Defendants’ Motion. However, the Court
will strike the final two sentences of Paragraph 155 as immaterial, impertinent, and scandalous.2
It is therefore
ORDERED that Defendants’ Rule 12(f) Motion to Strike Allegations in the Second
Amended Complaint (Docket No. 28) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
DATED October 21, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
United States District Judge
5C CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT & ARTHUR R. MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND
PROCEDURE §1380 (2007).
These sentences provide: “Plaintiffs further contend that a credible argument can be
made that but for Attorney Waddingham’s deceptive actions to defraud voters in the election
campaign, that Attorney Slavens would not have been killed. To that end, Plaintiffs contend that
if Attorney Slavens had been elected Millard County Attorney, he would not have been in the
circumstances that led to his death on December 12, 2013.” Docket No. 27, ¶ 155.
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?