COFFEY v. McCLURE, 13-cv-819-DRH-PMF. (2015)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20150211b77
Visitors: 6
Filed: Feb. 10, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 10, 2015
Summary: Order DAVID R. HERNDON, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on defendants Jeffco Leasing Co, Inc.'s motions to strike and dismiss certain allegations from defendant Pioneer Coach Inc.'s cross-claims (Doc. 37) and defendant Rodney McClure's cross-claims (Doc. 38). Jeffco Leasing Co, Inc. moves to strike and dismiss with prejudice sub-part (p) of paragraph 16 of both Pioneer and McClure's cross-claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and 12(f). As of today's date, cross claimaa
Summary: Order DAVID R. HERNDON, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on defendants Jeffco Leasing Co, Inc.'s motions to strike and dismiss certain allegations from defendant Pioneer Coach Inc.'s cross-claims (Doc. 37) and defendant Rodney McClure's cross-claims (Doc. 38). Jeffco Leasing Co, Inc. moves to strike and dismiss with prejudice sub-part (p) of paragraph 16 of both Pioneer and McClure's cross-claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and 12(f). As of today's date, cross claimaan..
More
Order
DAVID R. HERNDON, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on defendants Jeffco Leasing Co, Inc.'s motions to strike and dismiss certain allegations from defendant Pioneer Coach Inc.'s cross-claims (Doc. 37) and defendant Rodney McClure's cross-claims (Doc. 38). Jeffco Leasing Co, Inc. moves to strike and dismiss with prejudice sub-part (p) of paragraph 16 of both Pioneer and McClure's cross-claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and 12(f).
As of today's date, cross claimaant has not responded to the motion to dismiss. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(c), the Court considers the failure to respond as an admission of the merits of the motion to strike and dismiss.1 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion to strike and dismiss. The Court DISMISSES with prejudice sub-part (p) of paragraph 16 of both Pioneer and McClure's cross-claims (Doc. 37, 38).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Local Rule 7.1(c) provides in part: "Failure to timely file a response to a motion may, in the Court's discretion, be considered an admission of the merits of the motion."
Source: Leagle
