Civil Procedure I Outline

Modern Pleading

1. THE COMPLAINT

1. Details required under the complaint

Gillispie v Goodyear Service Stores

ISSUE
•Whether the plaintiffs complaint complies with the N.C. Code of Procedure which requires the plaintiff to make a plain and concise statement of the facts constituting the cause of action when the plaintiff said the def trespassed, assaulted, battered, falsely imprisoned, but did not describe the details of the alleged events.

RULE
•Legal conclusions do not support the case. Need details.

NOTES
•What are you trying to accomplish with pleadings?
1) Identifying baseless claims
2) Setting up both parties versions of the facts
3) Narrowing the issues of the complaint
4) Providing notice of the nature of the defense of claim (only one that is important under the federal rules, the rest part of codes).

2. Detail required under the Federal Rules

Dioguardi v Durning

ISSUE
•Whether the plaintiff in his complaint complies with Federal Rule 8(a) when he alleged that the defendant, a collector of customs, mishandled his property while in the custody of the collector.
•Does a plaintiff have to describe in detail all causes of action in the complaint for the complaint to be sufficient?

RATIONALE
•Federal Rules of Civil Procedure follow the notice pleading standard. A complaint need only put the court and the defendant on notice of the causes of action.
•For proper notice, complaints only need to present a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. Therefore, the district court erred by granting def’s motion.

NOTES
•Filing of a complaint commences the action and complaints in federal courts usually require:
(1) Statement of subject matter jurisdiction
(2) Short and plain statement of the claim, showing plaintiff entitled to relief
(3) Demand for judgment.

**Special matters (e.g. fraud, mistake or special damages) must be pleaded with more specificity.

3. Pleading the right to relief

FRCP 8(a)(2)

Garcia v Hilton Hotels Inc.

4. Pleading Special Matters

FRCP 9

Denny v Carey

ISSUE
•Whether a security fraud complaint satisfies Rule 9(b) by stating the circumstances constituting the alleged fraud with sufficient particularity when it does not include a stated claim upon which relief can be granted?

RULE
•The requirement of Rule 9(b) is met when there is sufficient identification of the circumstances constituting fraud so that the def can prepare an adequate answer to the allegations.
•It does not require nor make legitimate the pleading of detailed evidentiary matters.

NOTES
•Court says that once the plaintiff has met the minimum standards set forth thru Rule 9(b) which are only slightly more than required in Rule 8(b). The def should be able to flesh out the allegations during discovery b/c the plaintiff may not have all the information at that point in trial.

Differences between this case and Denny v Barber
•diff level of courts in diff districts
•the judges that sit on the panel of Deny v Barber likely have a finance back ground and might be more sympathetic toward a frivolous fraud allegation.

Swierkiewicz v Sorema N.A.

ISSUE
•Whether a complaint in an employment discrimination lawsuit must contain specific facts establishing a prima facie case of discrimination when it does not adequately allege the circumstances that support an inference of discrimination?
•Under FRCP 12(b)(6), was the plaintiffs alleged employment discrimination cause of action held under the right standard of review when the Court of Appeals used the McDonnell Douglas standard?

RULE
•Requirements for establishing a prima facie case for employment discrimination, need not prove more facts than necessary to pass muster under FRCP 12(b)(6)

NOTES
•The Supreme Ct pointed out that the prima facie case is an evidentiary standard, not a pleading requirement, nor is it an appropriate requirement at that point in the framework because further evidence to support the case might be found during discovery.
•Imposing the Ct of Appeals heightened pleading standard in employment discrimination conflicts with FRCR 8(a)(2) which says that a complaint must only contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief.
•A heightened plea requirement can only come from statutes
•Rule 9(f) says plea must contain the time and place allegation took place.

5. Alternative and Inconsistent Allegations

6. Pleading Damages

FRCP 9(g)

Ziervogel v Royal Packing Co.

ISSUE
•whether the evidence pertaining to a specific personal injury constituting “special damages” is admissible when the allegation of said injuries was not introduced during the pleading?
•Whether the trial court erred in allowing the evidence pertaining to high blood pressure and shoulder injury when she had pleaded injuries only to her neck, back, spine, and impaired her earning capacity when the Missouri Rule 55.19 states that items of special damages must be alleged in the pleading.

HOLDING
•Trial court ruled in error in permitting the plaintiff to introduce evidence of her high blood pressure when no such damage was pleaded in the plaintiff’s petition. Supreme Court ruled for the defendant stating that the plaintiff could only plead for general damages.

RULE
•When items of special damages are claimed, they shall be specifically stated.

NOTES
•Special damages are injuries that are not the necessary and inevitable results (logically foreseeable) of the injuries pleaded to.

7. The Prayer for Relief

FRCP 8(a)(3) and 54(c)

Bail v Cunningham

B. Responding to the Complaint

1. The time permitted for a response

FRCP 12(a)

2. Motions to Dismiss

American Nurses’ Association v Illinois

ISSUE
•Whether the trial court erred when they failed to dismiss a claim based on the complaint when the complaint can be read as asserting a comparable worth claim when comparable worth is not actionable (or be read as claiming intentional discrimination).

RULE
•The complaint was ok, even though some of the complaint leads to comparable worth, some of it may be interpreted in other ways. It is too early to dismiss the claim because there are allegations that allege intentional discrimination.
•Comparable worth is not the only way to read the complaint.

NOTES
•Reason they attached the comparable worth study to the complaint? To get the judge to thinking a certain way before the study even begins. It is bad to do because you may not have enough info and you might be dismissed because of that reason before the trial even begins.
•Analyze the complaint in a manner most favorable to the plaintiff.

3. Other Motions Attacking Pleadings

4. Answering the Complaint

Zielinski v Philadelphia Piers, Inc.

ISSUE
•Whether the court should advise the jury that the def admitted he is the owner/op of the fork lift involved in the accident when the def has generally denied the paragraph when some of the allegations are clearly true.

REASONING
Two reasons the court gives for coming up with the conclusion:
•It is an ineffective denial b/c Rule 8b requires that you be more specific. If you generally deny everything when some of the allegations are clearly true, how do they know what to believe?
•Equitable Estoppel- They allow all of theses accusations to be made and they do not deny them until it is to late for the plaintiff to correct his allegations and his statute of limitations had run out against the correct defendant.

NOTES
Number of ways you can get in trouble with your denials
•Denials for lack of information
•Negative pregnant
•Conjunctive denials

Improper Forms of Denial
•Denials for lack of information
•Negative pregnant Denials
•Conjunctive Denials

Affirmative Defenses

FRCP 8(c)

Ingraham v United States

ISSUE
•Whether the Medical Liability and Insurance Imp