From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Central States v. Bill Lake Buick, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
Sep 18, 2006
No. 06 C 3203 (N.D. Ill. Sep. 18, 2006)

Opinion

No. 06 C 3203.

September 18, 2006


MEMORANDUM ORDER


Bill Lake Buick, Inc. ("Bill Lake") has filed its Answer and Affirmative Defenses ("ADs") to an ERISA Complaint that calls on it to make payment under the withdrawal liability provisions of the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980. This brief memorandum order is issued to require Bill Lake's counsel to correct two errors in that responsive pleading.

First, Answer ¶¶ 4 and 9 through 14 do not conform properly to the disclaimer provisions of the second sentence of Fed.R.Civ.P. ("Rule") 8(b) — see App. ¶ 1 to State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Riley, 199 F.R.D. 276, 278 (N.D. Ill. 2001). Second, both of Bill Lake's purported ADs are at odds with the concept that is embodied in Rule 8(c) and the caselaw applying that Rule — see App. ¶ 5 to State Farm.

Accordingly the above-identified paragraphs of the Answer itself are stricken, with leave being granted to file properly amended versions of those paragraphs (not a totally self-contained Amended Answer) on or before September 29, 2006. And both ADs are also stricken — but without leave being granted to replead, for the assertions that they raise are amply preserved by Bill Lake's denial of the corresponding allegations of the Complaint.


Summaries of

Central States v. Bill Lake Buick, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
Sep 18, 2006
No. 06 C 3203 (N.D. Ill. Sep. 18, 2006)
Case details for

Central States v. Bill Lake Buick, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CENTRAL STATES, SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST AREAS PENSION FUND, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division

Date published: Sep 18, 2006

Citations

No. 06 C 3203 (N.D. Ill. Sep. 18, 2006)