From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Armbruster v. Eskola

United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania
Oct 5, 2022
4:21-CV-02070 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 5, 2022)

Opinion

4:21-CV-02070

10-05-2022

BIANCA J. ARMBRUSTER, Plaintiff, v. BRADLEY D. ESKOLA, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Matthew W. Brann Chief United States District Judge

In accordance with the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that

1. Plaintiff Bianca J. Armbruster's Motion to Strike the Innocent Defendants' Answer under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (Doc. 18) is DENIED AS MOOT.

2. Plaintiff's Motions to Strike the Biront and Eskola Defendants' Answers under Rule 11 (Doc. 19 and 56, respectively) are DENIED.

3. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Innocent Defendant's Amended Answer under Rule 12(f) (Doc. 71) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Innocent Defendants' first, second, fifth, thirteenth, and fifteenth affirmative defenses listed in their Amended Answer (Doc. 62) are STRICKEN. A Rule 16 conference will be scheduled by the Court by separate Order.


Summaries of

Armbruster v. Eskola

United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania
Oct 5, 2022
4:21-CV-02070 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 5, 2022)
Case details for

Armbruster v. Eskola

Case Details

Full title:BIANCA J. ARMBRUSTER, Plaintiff, v. BRADLEY D. ESKOLA, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania

Date published: Oct 5, 2022

Citations

4:21-CV-02070 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 5, 2022)