FORTNER v. RR DONNELLEY et al
| CATHY M. FORTNER |
| TIM ELMORE, ERICA EPPARD and RR DONNELLEY |
| 1:2013cv00619 |
| April 15, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Mark J. Dinsmore |
| William T. Lawrence |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
21
ENTRY ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS: For the foregoing reasons, the Defendants' motion to dismiss 5 is GRANTED. However, district courts routinely do not terminate a case at the same time that they grant a motion to dismiss; rather , they generally dismiss the plaintiff's complaint without prejudice and give the plaintiff at least one opportunity to amend her complaint. Foster v. DeLuca, 545 F.3d 582, 584 (7th Cir. 2008); see also Barry Aviation, Inc. v. Land O'Lake s Mun. Airport Comm'n, 377 F.3d 682, 687 (7th Cir. 2004) (better practice is to allow at least one amendment regardless of how unpromising the initial pleading appears). Such a result is appropriate here. Fortner shall have until September 3, 2 013, to file an amended complaint that does not include claims that are outside the scope of her EEOC charge. If she does not do so by that date, this case will be dismissed with prejudice ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 7/29/2013.(DW)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
