Jackson, Lonnie v. Raemisch, Rick et al

Filing 21

ORDER placing 19 Response to Answer in court file without consideration. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 9/23/10. (elc),(ps)

Download PDF
Jackson, Lonnie v. Raemisch, Rick et al Doc. 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN LONNIE L. JACKSON, P l a in t i f f , v. JA S O N SMITH, JEFFREY JABER, JON HIBBARD, LORI MEITZEN, TROY EHNERT, R A N D Y J. SPRANGERS, HANS KUSTER, W E N D Y CARIVOU and DOUG DEMOTTS, D e fe n d a n t s . ORDER 1 0 -c v -2 1 2 -s lc Plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in this action on July 30, 2010. On September 7, 2010, defendants answered plaintiff's complaint, raising various affirmative defenses. Now plaintiff has filed a document titled "Response to Defendants Answer," in which he replies to factual statements made in the answer and argues that certain of defendants' affirmative defenses are not valid. Plaintiff does not need to be concerned: although defendants have raised certain affirmative defenses in their answer, defendants have not actually filed a motion to dismiss. Therefore, plaintiff does not need to reply to the answer. If defendants later file an actual motion to dismiss, then plaintiff will be allowed to respond to that motion. In the meantime, Rules 7(a) and 8(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure work together to protect plaintiff from defendants' claims in the answer. Because of those rules, this court does not need plaintiff to reply to the answer; instead, the court automatically assumes that plaintiff has denied the factual statements and affirmative defenses raised in that answer. Dockets.Justia.com OR DER IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's reply to the answer, dkt 19, will be placed in the court's file but will not be considered. Entered this 23rd day of September, 2010. BY THE COURT: /s/ STEPHEN L. CROCKER Magistrate Judge 2

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?