Scott v. Painter et al, No. 1:2011cv01657 - Document 13 (N.D. Ohio 2011)

Court Description: Opinion and Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 9/23/11 denying plaintiff's motion to strike defendants' answer. (Related Doc. 8 ) (M,G)

Download PDF
Scott v. Painter et al Doc. 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO ------------------------------------------------------: GERARD F. SCOTT : : Plaintiff, : : v. : : STACY PAINTER, et. al, : : Defendants. : : ------------------------------------------------------- CASE NO. 1:11-CV-1657 ORDER [Resolving Doc. No. 8.] JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: Plaintiff Gerard F. Scott moves, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), to strike the Defendants’ answer as unresponsive. [Doc. 8.] The Defendants oppose this motion. [Doc. 12.] On August 9, 2011, Plaintiff Scott filed a complaint against the Defendants Stacy Painter, Ronald Niemann, Dave Eschweiler, and the City of Bedford. The Plaintiff alleges violations of the Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights and false arrest. [Doc. 1.] The Defendants filed an answer on September 7, 2011. [Doc. 7.] Under Rule 12(f), “The court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). Motions to strike, however, are disfavored, and “the motion to strike should be granted only when the pleading to be striken has no possible relation to the controversy.” Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. U.S., 201 F.2d 819, 822 (6th Cir. 1953). Moreover, Rule 8(b)(1) requires only that “in responding to a -1- Dockets.Justia.com Case No. 1:11-CV-1657 Gwin, J. pleading, a party must . . . state in short and plain terms its defenses to each claim asserted against it.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b). The Defendants’ answer states an admission, denial, or lack of knowledge to each paragraph of the complaint. This Court finds that the Defendants’ answer sufficiently responds to the Plaintiff’s complaint. Therefore, the Court DENIES the Plaintiff’s motion to strike the Defendants’ answer. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ James S. Gwin JAMES S. GWIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: September 23, 2010 -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.