From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lukaszuk v. Sudeen

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Jan 29, 2007
CV 2002-5143 (JG) (MDG) (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2007)

Opinion

CV 2002-5143 (JG) (MDG).

January 29, 2007


ORDER


Defendant Motilla Sudeen has moved for an extension of time to respond to the complaint. Ct. doc. 30. His request for an extension of time to 30 days after his receipt of discovery responses is denied, but his time to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint is further extended to February 23, 2007. He is advised that defendants ordinarily answer a complaint without the benefit of discovery. Rule 8(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "[i]f a party is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of an averment, the party shall so state and this has the effect of a denial." Instead of answering a complaint, a defendant may, at his option, make a motion on one of the grounds described in Rule 12(b). This Court will send defendant Sudeen copies of Rules 8, 9 and 12 of the Federal Rules which concerning pleadings, answers and motions in lieu of answers.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lukaszuk v. Sudeen

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Jan 29, 2007
CV 2002-5143 (JG) (MDG) (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2007)
Case details for

Lukaszuk v. Sudeen

Case Details

Full title:KRZYSZTOF LUKASZUK, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MOTILLA L. SUDEEN, also know as…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. New York

Date published: Jan 29, 2007

Citations

CV 2002-5143 (JG) (MDG) (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 29, 2007)