Second Circuit Court of Appeals - 1944 (139 F2d 774)
Facts:
P claimed that D swindled him out of his goods.
P was foreign, did not have a good grasp on the English language, and refused counsel.
His complaint was nearly impossible to read and decipher.
D moved to dismiss saying that P's complain did not state a cause of action.
Procedural History:
Lower court found for D.
Court of Appeals reversed, found for P.
Issues:
Is there a pleading requirement of stating "facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"?
Holding/Rule:
Under the rules of civil procedure, there is no pleading requirement of stating facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, but only that there be a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.
Reasoning:
The new rules of civil procedure state that there needs to be "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief".
It is preferable that the claim is decided on merits, not on the form of the complaint.
