Legal Opinion

Howarth v. Patterson

District Court, D. Arizona

Decided April 8, 2020No. 2:19-cv-00726Unknown

1Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Morgan Howarth, No. CV-19-00726-PHX-ESW 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Ryan Patterson, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s “Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses” 17 (Doc. 111). The Court has reviewed Defendants’ Response (Doc. 112) and Plaintiff’s 18 Reply (Doc. 116). For the reasons explained herein, the Motion (Doc. 111) will be granted. 19 I. LEGAL STANDARDS 20 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) authorizes the court to “strike from a pleading 21 an insufficient defense…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mladen Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
  2. Sidney-Vinstein v. A.H. Robins Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
  3. Lazar v. Trans Union LLCDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2000
  4. Overstreet v. Thomas Davis Medical Centers, PCDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API