Cites - four corners doctrine and motions to dismiss

[suijuris]

HB, you were asking about the four corners doctrine somewhere and I was unable to find that post, so I will post this information here. Most of these cites deal with motions to dismiss and may be useful in that regards as well.





Parties submitted affidavits and other evidence outside of the four corners of the pleadings, in connection with motion to dismiss, and thus court had to either exclude additional materials from its consideration and decide motion based solely upon complaint, or convert motion to one for summary judgment. SIFCO Industries, Inc. v. Advanced Plating Technologies, Inc., S.D.N.Y.1994, 867 F.Supp. 155.



Though court, on motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, must limits its analysis to the four corners of the complaint, it also may consider documents incorporated into complaint by reference and information that could be judicially noticed, and must draw all reasonable inferences in plaintiff's favor. Church of Scientology Intern. v. Time Warner, Inc., S.D.N.Y.1992, 806 F.Supp. 1157.



Court may not look beyond four corners of plaintiff's pleadings when ruling on motion to dismiss for failure to state claim. Patton v. United Parcel Service, Inc., S.D.Tex.1995, 910 F.Supp. 1250.



Ordinarily motion to dismiss is addressed to four corners of complaint without consideration of other documents or facts outside complaint. Haskell v. Time, Inc., E.D.Cal.1994, 857 F.Supp. 1392.



Court is restricted to face of pleadings and may look only within four corners of complaint in evaluating motion to dismiss for failure to state claim. In re Catfish Antitrust Litigation, N.D.Miss.1993, 826 F.Supp. 1019.



A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim tests formal sufficiency of complaint and is limited to the four corners of that pleading. American Cas. Co. v. Glaskin, D.Colo.1992, 805 F.Supp. 866.



In considering propriety of motion for summary judgment in contract action, district court must not look beyond four corners of the document. Brillion Iron Works v. Simpson, N.D.Miss.1979, 86 F.R.D. 9.



When intent of parties to contract is wholly unambiguous on face of the agreement, disposition on motion for summary judgment may be appropriate; however, when language is unclear and search for content extends beyond four corners of the agreement, intended meaning of the contract is a disputed and, necessarily, material question of fact, and summary judgment is improper. NRM Corp. v. Hercules, Inc., C.A.D.C.1985, 758 F.2d 676, 244 U.S.App.D.C. 356.



In motion to dismiss, court looks to four corners of complaint and is required to accept plaintiff's allegations as true and construe those allegations in light most favorable to plaintiff; complaint will be dismissed only if plaintiff can prove no set of facts that would entitle him to relief. Schmid, Inc. v. Zucker's Gifts, Inc., S.D.N.Y.1991, 766 F.Supp. 118.



In deciding motion to dismiss, court must limit its analysis to four corners of complaint, and must accept plaintiff's allegations of fact as true, together with such reasonable inferences as may be drawn in his favor. Todaro v. Orbit Intern. Travel, Ltd., S.D.N.Y.1991, 755 F.Supp. 1229.



Parties submitted affidavits and other evidence outside of the four corners of the pleadings, in connection with motion to dismiss, and thus court had to either exclude additional materials from its consideration and decide motion based solely upon complaint, or convert motion to one for summary judgment. SIFCO Industries, Inc. v. Advanced Plating Technologies, Inc., S.D.N.Y.1994, 867 F.Supp. 155.



Complaint failed to satisfy particularity requirement for pleading securities fraud by bank, where complaint claimed that several lending transactions should have been disclosed, and where it failed to explain how omission of requested information made challenged statements misleading; even though another complaint filed in related case explained why many of the same omissions were misleading, complaint had to stand or fall on what was contained within its four corners. Konstantinakos v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp., D.Mass.1989, 719 F.Supp. 35.



Claimant's motion to dismiss for failure to state claim would be treated as motion for summary judgment because motion to dismiss contained factual elaboration that transcended the four corners of the complaint. U.S. v. $200,226.00 in U.S. Currency, D.Puerto Rico 1994, 864 F.Supp. 1414, vacated 57 F.3d 1061 .





Note the parties in the last cite, I found that interesting.

SJ, This is the first time I have heard of the Four Corners rule, but I have been researching it and my defense this morning, and It looks very exciting.



I appreciate your posting of this.



Thanks



HB

[seeker]

Could someone elaborate on the "Four Corners: Doctrine? Is this the basis for cornforth's four legs?



Seeker

No,



It refers to the four corners of a document.



HB

would that be an "out of bounds" rule?



jon

[seeker]

who gets the whistle? LOL

[weishaupt1776]

[color=black][b]Review the play & get it overturned w/ void judgement.

[sadie]

Could someone please explain what the four corners thing is?



I have 2 CC cases right now and would like to know if it is something I should be using but I never heard of it.



Thanks a bunch

[suijuris]

Ok, let's take this cite for example:



Court is restricted to face of pleadings and may look only within four corners of complaint in evaluating motion to dismiss for failure to state claim. In re Catfish Antitrust Litigation, N.D.Miss.1993, 826 F.Supp. 1019.



So, the bank is sues me, and says I "used the credit card". First of all, they presume my signature exist on some crucial documents. But that is another topic.



If the bank does not specificly state that they loaned me their property, and demands "repayment", have they stated a claim upon which relief can be granted?



That is something that needs researching. Because IF the bank needs to make that claim and does not, guess what I would do? Motion to dismiss. And a reading of the cites above hold that the plaintiff cannot come back with additional information after I make said motion. Case dismissed.



Just my thoughts, I have not studied on this issue, just came across the cites and thought they could be of help. If somebody can research more in depth the issue of "stating a claim upon which relief can be granted", this would be pure gold.



I did half the research, anyone else want to pick up the torch?

[seeker]

Thanks, SJ. It definitely is usable for CCC suits. It arrived in the nick of time for me to include. And I thank you.



I have given the judge so much to think about, he would be crazy to perpetuate this case -- let's pray he believes so too!

Seeker