Milton v. General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems, Inc.
United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
2011 WL 4708637 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 4, 2011)
Bobby Milton (plaintiff) filed a three-count complaint: Count I alleged Title VII retaliation against Ira Clark (defendant), Count II alleged section 1981 race discrimination and retaliation against Clark, and Count III alleged Title VII race discrimination and retaliation against General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems (defendant), incorporating paragraphs 1-52 of Count I by reference even though Count I's heading named only Clark. General Dynamics declined to answer Count I's allegations, reasoning they targeted only Clark, and simply incorporated those same non-answers when responding to Count III's incorporated paragraphs, closing with a boilerplate statement that any allegation not specifically admitted or denied was denied; Milton moved to have the unanswered paragraphs of Count III deemed admitted, and General Dynamics opposed, arguing it owed no response to allegations aimed at Clark and that its closing denial covered everything else.
Whether, under Rule 8(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a defendant is required to specifically admit, deny, or state insufficient knowledge for each and every allegation of the complaint.