From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Grassano v. Serumido, Ltd.

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
Jan 25, 2008
No. 08 C 458 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 25, 2008)

Opinion

No. 08 C 458.

January 25, 2008


MEMORANDUM ORDER


Serumido, Ltd. ("Serumido") has filed its Answer to the Complaint brought against it by Fortuna Grassano in this action just removed to this District Court from the Circuit Court of Cook County. This memorandum order is issued sua sponte because of the manner in which Serumido's counsel has dealt with Complaint ¶ 3:

3. At all relevant times, Jonathan Goldsmith ("Goldsmith") was acting as an agent/employee of defendant within the course of said agency/employment.
ANSWER: Defendant neither admits nor denies the allegations of Paragraph 3 as they are too vague to permit a rationale response. Further answering, Defendant states that Goldsmith did on various occasions act as an agent of Defendant.

Quite apart from counsel's misspelling of "rational," that purported response is really nonsensical. Fed.R.Civ.P. ("Rule") 8(b) calls for a straightforward response ("aye" or "nay") to Grassano's readily answerable allegation, and Answer ¶ 3 is accordingly stricken with leave to file an appropriate amended answer to that paragraph on or before February 1, 2008, failing which the allegation in Complaint ¶ 3 will be deemed to have been admitted.


Summaries of

Grassano v. Serumido, Ltd.

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
Jan 25, 2008
No. 08 C 458 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 25, 2008)
Case details for

Grassano v. Serumido, Ltd.

Case Details

Full title:FORTUNA GRASSANO, Plaintiff, v. SERUMIDO, LTD., Defendant

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

Date published: Jan 25, 2008

Citations

No. 08 C 458 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 25, 2008)