Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

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)


Facts

Bobby E. Milton (plaintiff) filed a complaint with three counts. The first count alleged retaliation in violation of Title VII against Ira E. Clark (defendant). The second count alleged racial discrimination and retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against Clark. The third count alleged racial discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII against General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems, Inc. (General Dynamics) (defendant). The heading for Count I only referenced Clark. Count I included paragraphs 7-52, which primarily concerned Milton’s employment with Clark, but also included allegations against General Dynamics. Paragraphs 1-52 of Count III incorporated by reference paragraphs 1-52 of Count I. In response to Count I of the complaint, General Dynamics stated that it was not required to respond to the allegations in Count I, because they were directed at Clark. In response to paragraphs 1-52 of Count III, General Dynamics incorporated its answers to paragraphs 1-52 of Count I. General Dynamics concluded its answer with a statement that each allegation that it did not specifically admit or deny was denied. Milton moved to have paragraphs 6-52 of Count III deemed admitted, because General Dynamics failed to admit or deny those allegations. General Dynamics opposed the motion, arguing that it was not required to answer allegations directed against Clark. General Dynamics also argued that its concluding statement indicated that every allegation not specifically admitted or denied was denied.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Wilkerson, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.