Firestone Financial Corp. v. JHM Equipment Leasing Company et al, No. 1:2013cv07241 - Document 77 (N.D. Ill. 2014)
Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order signed by the Honorable Miltion I. Shadur on 6/11/2014: Defendant Meyer's motion 62 for leave to file additional affirmative defenses and counterclaims is denied. Mailed notice (gds) Modified on 6/11/2014 (gds).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Firestone Financial Corp. v. JHM Equipment Leasing Company et al Doc. 77 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION FIRESTONE FINANCIAL CORP., Plaintiff, v. J H M EQUIPMENT LEASING COMPANY, J H MEYER ENTERPRISES, INC., DOLPHIN LAUNDRY SERVICES, INC., and JOHN MEYER, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 13 C 7241 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Throughout the eight months since this action was brought against John Meyer ("Meyer") and his several controlled corporations by lender Firestone Financial Corp. ("Firestone"), Meyer has been seeking to stave off what appeared from the outset to be the inevitable loss of his and their business enterprise that engages in leasing commercial laundry equipment (which equipment had been pledged as collateral for Firestone's several loans) and in related activity. In the meantime this Court has given Meyer more leeway than was probably due him, based on his repeated statements that he was in the process of obtaining counsel to represent him. 1 Now, fully five months after Meyer filed his Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims to Firestone's Complaint, Meyer has sought to take the offensive by seeking leave to file additional affirmative defenses and counterclaims. That extended delay without proffering any even half-persuasive justification, compounded by inconsistencies between the factual and legal positions originally taken by Meyer and what he now seeks to assert, negates 1 Meanwhile a default judgment has been entered against each of Meyer's corporate co-defendants. Dockets.Justia.com the existence of both good cause and excusable neglect, which are set as standards by Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). At least as importantly, both those inconsistencies and the demonstrably false assertions advanced by Meyer in attempted support of his current motion (see pages 2 and 3 of Firestone's just-filed Response to that motion) conclusively show that Meyer has failed miserably to satisfy the "plausibility" standard established by the Trombly-Iqbal canon. This Court need not provide chapter and verse as to the multiple reasons that compel denial of Meyer's motion -- Firestone's Response has effectively driven multiple nails into the coffin of Meyer's proposed pleading. In short, Meyer's motion (Dkt.62) must be and is denied out of hand. Meyer is free to devote his entire attention to responding to Firestone's motion for summary judgment, required to be filed on or before June 30, 2014. __________________________________________ Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge Date: June 11, 2014 -2-
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
