Doctor John's Inc. v. Village of Cahokia, 3:18-cv-00171-JPG-RJD. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20181011c13
Visitors: 3
Filed: Oct. 10, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 10, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT , District Judge . Pursuant to this Court's directive following the defendants' motion for summary judgment, plaintiff Doctor John's has filed another amended complaint. ( See ECF Nos. 32, 33.) While this second-amended complaint complies with most of this Court's prior instructions, it fails in two regards: it (1) re-pleads the substantive due process claim, which the Court has already dismissed and did not give Doctor John's permission to bring again
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER J. PHIL GILBERT , District Judge . Pursuant to this Court's directive following the defendants' motion for summary judgment, plaintiff Doctor John's has filed another amended complaint. ( See ECF Nos. 32, 33.) While this second-amended complaint complies with most of this Court's prior instructions, it fails in two regards: it (1) re-pleads the substantive due process claim, which the Court has already dismissed and did not give Doctor John's permission to bring again;..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. PHIL GILBERT, District Judge.
Pursuant to this Court's directive following the defendants' motion for summary judgment, plaintiff Doctor John's has filed another amended complaint. (See ECF Nos. 32, 33.) While this second-amended complaint complies with most of this Court's prior instructions, it fails in two regards: it (1) re-pleads the substantive due process claim, which the Court has already dismissed and did not give Doctor John's permission to bring again; and (2) names Curtis McCall as a defendant in this matter, even though the Court already dismissed him as an unnecessary party. So for the reasons already explained in this Court's order granting in part and denying in part the defendants' motion for summary judgment (See ECF No. 32), the Court again DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE (1) Count III of the complaint—the substantive due process theory— and (2) defendant Curtis McCall. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to terminate Curtis McCall as a defendant in this matter.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
