Eric Hildebrandt et al. v. siParadigm LLC; Health Lynks, LLC; Aziz Saad; Chris Weidman; John and Jane Does 1-10; and ABC Corps. 1-10

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed, without prejudice, Plaintiffs’ 229-page consolidated complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 because it was excessively prolix, unclear, repetitive, internally contradictory, and failed to provide adequate notice of the claims. The court denied Defendants’ motion to strike and alternative motion to dismiss as moot. Plaintiffs were granted thirty days to file an amended pleading, with failure to do so resulting in dismissal with prejudice.

Holdings

1. The consolidated complaint did not comply with Rules 8(a)(2) and 8(d)(1) because it was excessively prolix, unclear, contradictory, repetitive, and failed to provide defendants fair notice of the claims and comprehensible factual allegations.
2. The court could dismiss the consolidated complaint on its own initiative for failure to comply with Rule 8.
3. Plaintiffs were granted thirty days to file an amended pleading, and the dismissal was without prejudice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the consolidated complaint complied with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2)'s requirement that a pleading contain a short and plain statement showing entitlement to relief.
2. Whether the complaint was so prolix, contradictory, vague, ambiguous, and unintelligible that dismissal under Rule 8 was appropriate.
3. Whether plaintiffs should be granted leave to amend after dismissal for failure to comply with Rule 8.

Disposition

dismissed