Pleading the Claim for Relief | Legal and Factual Sufficiency

[herdofturtles]

Rule 8(a)(2)

The plaintiff must present "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief."

In Code States, in contrast, a plaintiff must make "a statement of the facts constituting a cause if action." Code States don't follow Rule 8(a)(2).

Rule 8(a)(2) was created because there were over complex definitions of


• Facts


• Causes of action




Two Kinds of Insufficiencies


• Legal


• Factual



In a Code State, a lawyer will challenge a legal insufficiency by filing a general demurrer and challenge a factual insufficiency by filing a special demurrer. A court will either sustain or overrule the demurrer.

Under Federal Provisions, a lawyer will challenge a legal insufficiency by filing a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. A court will either grant or deny the motion.

12(b)(6) factual insufficiency:

(OLD) Under Cloney v. Gibson, the challenge is covered by two rules. (1) Assume truth of everything alleged, and (2) grant a motion to dismiss for factual insufficiency only if beyond all doubt the plaintiff cannot prove any facts supporting their claim.

(NEW) Under Twombly and Iqbal, the 12(b)(6) motion is much easier to grant. Fact and legal separated out. Only assume the truth of factual allegations, do not assume legal conclusions, no matter how murky the line is. This does not require "detailed factual allegations," but does require more than "naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement." (contradictory). The Plaintiff's allegation must be plausible. "More likely explanations. Very slippery. The judge may use "judicial experience and common sense" to decide if the claims are plausible.

Result:

Under Cloney, it did not matter who the judge presiding over the case was. Under Twombly and Iqbal, the judge presiding over the case is the most important factor of if it is granted or denied.

Legal Sufficiency

Federal focuses on the statement of the claim while the state code focuses on a cause of action.

If there are several claims and only one is defective—the court dismisses the defective one only

• usually grant a leave to amend


• (unless it becomes clear that it can't be amended)

The court only looks at

:

Face of the complaint. It does not look at the evidence.

Does the law recognise a right to recover on the facts she has alleged?"

"If the plaintiff proved everything she has alleged here, would she win?"

What happens if the complaint is dismissed under 12(b)(6)?

"P is free to appeal the final judgement to the court of appeals to argue that the law ought to Be changed to recognize the claim."

Factual Sufficiency

Assuming the law recognises a claim, how much detail must the plaintiff allege to support that claim?

Code State: Requires "ultimate facts." If they are too general, the demurrer is sustained and the pleading is considered a "conclusion of law." If they are too specific, the demurrer is sustained and the pleading is considered "evidentiary facts." This was very subjective and often left to a court to decide if they thought it was too broad or specific.

Federal Rule: The lowered barrier went hand-in-hand with expanded discovery provisions.

"The only issue under Rule 8(a)(2) is whether the plaintiff has alleged enough to justify having the case proved in litigation."

Rule 8 only requires that a plaintiff give defendant "fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the grounds upon which it rests."