Dioguardi v. Durning
Second Circuit Court of Appeals - 1944 (139 F2d 774)
- 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.
- Lower court found for D.
- Court of Appeals reversed, found for P.
- Is there a pleading requirement of stating "facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"?
- 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.
- 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.