Dioguardi v. Durning
Facts: P claimed that D improperly handled his imported goods and sold them at an action. P brought an action for conversion against D. P drafted his own complaint and D filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action. Procedure: District court dismissed P’s complaint. Issue: Does a P have to describe in detail all causes of action in the complaint for the complaint to be sufficient? Holding: No 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, a complaint 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 D’s motion. Note: Filing of a complaint commences the action. Complaints in federal courts usually require: (1) statement of subject matter jurisdiction; (2) short and plain statement of the claim, showing P entitled to relief; (3) demand for judgment. **Special matters (e.g. fraud, mistake or special damages) must be pleaded with more specificity. Further The P claimed 5000 for his injuries. 1st complaint was dismissed by the Dist. Ct with leave to amend. o P filed and amended complaint dismissed again on same grounds. Court Decision o Under new rules there is no need for pleading requirement of stating facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. There only needs to be a short hand complaint that P is entitled to relief. The D in this case filed Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Leatherman v. Tarrant County
Facts: Two Ps brought actions against the county for violations of their civil rights. Ps claimed that police officers violated their civil rights by improperly serving search warrants of their homes.
Procedure: The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals had adopted a heightened pleading standard when it came to lawsuits involving municipality liability. The district court dismissed Ps’ complaints and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Issue: Can a court adopt special heightened standards of pleading for certain categories of cases? Holding: No 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, a complaint only need to present a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. A court may not adopt heightened standards of pleading for certain cases when under FRCP, no such standard is implemented. Reversed. **Special matters (e.g. fraud, mistake or special damages) must be pleaded with more specificity. Further U.S. Dist. Ct. of the northern district of Texas dismissed and then the 5th circuit dismissed for failure to meet heightened pleading standard. D have two arguments to support lower courts ruling o D argument 1: they claim that they are just like state or local officials and are free from suits. A relaxed pleading requirement would subject them to excessive suits. Court response: they mistake freedom from liability with immunity. Has no immunity. Can be held liable if municple custom or policy caused the constitutional injury o D argument 2: Given that the Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 only mentions fraud or mistake the lower court erred in granting heightening pleading rule.
McCormick v. Kopmann Facts: P is suing D for killing her husband Count I P alleges that D came over line in the road and crashed into her husband’s car, killing him. The husband did not do anything wrong Count IV She us suing the bar that he was att because he drove home drunk and was killed when he crashed into another car. D says: Count I moved to dismiss because Count I and Iv could not stand together.
Jury returned verdict for P. D appeals First appeal is that trail ct. erred in jury instructions. The court ruled that you can include two contradicting counts like this. Part of the purpose is to find the facts and find the truth.