Essential Litigation Skills: Meeting Federal Standards for Pleading Plausible Claims for Relief

This CLE webinar will discuss what Federal Rule 8(a)(2) means by "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief" and what happens if a pleader does not meet that standard. The panelists will also discuss applying these standards to affirmative defenses and counterclaims and how to avoid (or obtain) a dismissal with prejudice for failing to plead a plausible claim, as well as the interplay of both local rules and local custom.

As the first filing in a lawsuit, the complaint has several purposes and goals, but it will get dismissed if it does not show that the plaintiff's claim for relief is "plausible" as directed by Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009).

While this sounds easy, it can be difficult if not impossible in some of the most important types of lawsuits. Many a well-heeled firm has had complaints dismissed with prejudice because they could not state a "plausible" claim for relief.

Pleading a plausible and well-stated claim for relief requires hard work. Nothing hamstrings a young lawyer's reputation quite as easily as filing "shotgun" pleadings, which do little more than waste valuable attorney time and court resources.

Listen as this experienced panel of trial attorneys offers strategies and guidance for proper and competent pleading and how those on the receiving end can efficiently and effectively respond.