Free Order on Motion to Dismiss - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 49.8 kB
Pages: 2
Date: October 27, 2003
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 320 Words, 2,010 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22163/21.pdf

Download Order on Motion to Dismiss - District Court of Connecticut ( 49.8 kB)


Preview Order on Motion to Dismiss - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-00300-MRK

Document 21

Filed 10/27/2003

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT Marchelle Bailey Plaintiff, v. : : : : : : : : : :

NO.

3:03cv300 (MRK)

Winkle Bus Company, et al. Defendant.

ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [doc. #10] is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. Given the low threshold for notice pleading, see Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 511-14 (2002), this Court cannot say that there exists no set of circumstances that Plaintiff could adduce with respect to this complaint which would allow a jury to find in her favor. Accordingly, the motion is dismiss is DENIED as to counts 1 and 2, and GRANTED without objection as to counts 3 and 4. The Plaintiff will file an amended complaint dropping Counts 3 and 4. The parties will file a joint status report by April 2, 2004, and a status conference will be held on April 15, 2004, at 11:30 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Mark R. Kravitz U.S.D.J. Dated at New Haven, Connecticut: October 27, 2003 1

Case 3:03-cv-00300-MRK

Document 21

Filed 10/27/2003

Page 2 of 2

RE:

CASE NO. 3:03cv300 (MRK)

----------------------------------------------------------------

TO:

COUNSEL OF RECORD:

---------------------------------------------------------------On or before April 2, 2004, THE PARTIES SHALL SUBMIT TO THE CHAMBERS OF THE HONORABLE MARK R. KRAVITZ[with certification copies sent to all counsel of record] AN ORIGINAL STATUS REPORT, STATING THE FOLLOWING: (a) THE STATUS OF THE CASE, IDENTIFYING ANY PENDING MOTIONS, OR ANY CIRCUMSTANCES POTENTIALLY INTERFERING WITH THE PARTIES' COMPLIANCE WITH THE SCHEDULING ORDER; (b) INTEREST IN REFERRAL FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES TO A UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE OR TO THE DISTRICT`S SPECIAL MASTERS PROGRAM; (c) WHETHER THE PARTIES WILL CONSENT TO A TRIAL BEFORE A MAGISTRATE JUDGE; AND (d) THE ESTIMATED LENGTH OF TRIAL. NO STATUS REPORTS WILL BE ACCEPTED VIA FACSIMILE.

BY ORDER OF THE COURT KEVIN F. ROWE, CLERK

2