aS

Minay ser Form (497)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Jud i Sitting Judge if Ou
pe Magistente Judge Milton I. Shadur ian Assigned Judge
CASE NUMBER 03 C 4566 DATE 10/20/2003
CASE Sam Calascibetta vs. Village of Oak Park
TITLE

[ln the following box (a) indicate the party filing the motion, e.g,, plaintiff, defendant, 3rd party plaintiff, and (b) state briefly the nature
of the motion being presented,] :

a)

MOTION:

DOCKET ENTRY:

ql) Q Filed motion of [ use listing in “Motion” box above,]

Q) a Brief in support of motion due :

(3) Oo Answer brief to motion due___. Reply to answer briefdue___.

(4) o Ruling/Hearingon___setfor__at

(5) oO Status hearing{held/continued to] [set for/re-set for]on__—_sset fort

(6) im} Pretrial conference[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for]on_____setfor_——at__.

(7) o Trial[set for/re-set for]on___at :

(8) oO [Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continued to at

@) im This case is dismissed [with/without] prejudice an without costs[by/agreement/pursuant to]
CIFRCP4¢m) ClLocal Rule 41.1 OFRCP41(@)(1) ” CO FRCP41(a)Q2).

(10) MW [Other docket entry} Enter Memorandum Order, Accordingly, as stated at the outset, both Heise’s

and Wiggin’s most recent responsive pleadings are stricken from the file. Their counsel are granted leave
to file a Second Amended Answer and Ads in this Court’s chambers on or before October 30, 2003. In
the interest of conserving the environment as well as facilitating the review and comparison of the
respective responses, counsel are directed to file a single pleading on behalf of the two individual
defendants. ;

[For further detail see order attached to the original minute order,]

No notices required, advised in open court.
No notices required.

Notices mailed by judge’s staff.

Notified counsel by telephone.

Docketing to mail notices.

Mail AO 450 form.

Copy to judge/magistrate judge.

docketing deputy tials

SN

10/20/2008
courtroom date mailed notice
deputy’s ou
initials

Date/time, received in.”

central Clerk’ Office mailing deputy initials

S tyehtin



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

SAM A. CALASCIBETTA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 03 C 4566
) D0CKETED
VILLAGE OF OAK PARK, et al., ) OCT 23
) 2003
)

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

All three defendants in this employment discrimination
action brought by Sam Calascibetta ("Calascibetta”)--Village of
Oak Park (“Village”), Village Attorney Raymond Heise (“Heise”)
and Assistant Village Manager M. Ray Wiggins (“Wiggins”) --have
filed Amended Answers and Affirmative Defenses (“ADs”) to
Calascibetta's Complaint. This memorandum order is issued sua
sponte to strike the meaningfully inadequate responsive pleadings
filed by Heise and Wiggins and to require them to replead.

In each instance Heise and Wiggins forgoes answering
Calascibetta's allegations in Complaint Counts One and Two on the
premise that those allegations target only Village, and Wiggins
also eschews a response to the allegations of Complaint Count
Three on the basis that they are directed only against Heise.

But in doing so their counsel neglects the fact that each of the
counts advanced against their clients--Count Three against Heise
and Count Four against Wiggins--begins in this fashion:

1-58. Plaintiff Sam A. Calascibetta realleges

(2



vy

paragraphs 1-58, inclusive, of Count --,* as Paragraphs

1-58, inclusive, of this Count [Three or Four, as the

case may be].

So when each defendant purportedly “restates and incorporates by
reference” his responses to the earlier count, that is totally
meaningless--it refers back to nothing at all.?

Accordingly, as stated at the outset, both Heise's and
Wiggins' most recent responsive pleadings are stricken from the
file. Their counsel are granted leave to file a Second Amended
Answer and ADs’ in this Court's chambers (with a copy of course
being transmitted to Calascibetta's counsel) on or before
October 30, 2003. In the interest of conserving the environment
as well as facilitating the review and comparison of the

vespective responses, counsel are directed to file a single

pleading on behalf of the two individual defendants.

Clk craton.

Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge

Date: October 20, 2003

+ In Count Three the word omitted from the quoted text is

“Two,” and in Count Four the word omitted is “Three.”

* Nor is what has been referred to in the text merely

harmless error. At least in part, the non-responded-to
allegations ascribe some conduct to the individual defendants.

3. This memorandum order has not addressed the legal
sufficiency of any of the ADs, so no inference should be drawn
from granting leave to replead them.

2