Can I Please Get An Explanation About Something

Charlie Blue · #1 03-08-2008, 07:16 PM

The statement, "failing to state a case for which relief can be given". What exactly does that mean? Can I get a few examples as well.

Jerry Pitts · #2 03-08-2008, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlie Blue

The statement, "failing to state a case for which relief can be given". What exactly does that mean? Can I get a few examples as well.

First of all, you are misquoting; it should be reading the same with the exception of the last word. The last word is "granted" not "given". Now I will defer to those others that have a better working knowledge of the inner workings of the courtroom than do I.

Jerry Carlos

indago · #3 03-08-2008, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlie Blue

The statement, "failing to state a case for which relief can be given". What exactly does that mean? Can I get a few examples as well.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...+state+a+claim

Charlie Blue · #4 03-09-2008, 04:42 AM

Jerry Pitts and Indago, thanks. (thumb up icon)

farmer_giles_of_ham · #5 03-09-2008, 04:47 AM

"failing to state a case for which relief can be granted"

right there is the key to much of what goes on in litigation.

Any party that makes a claim must do so in a way that is understandable to the court- to give the court power, or jurisdiction, to hear and decide anything.

So often charges and other demands are made without fully stating every required element.

Contrary to popular opinion, there is no such thing as "being charged with being charged"- even though this is how "business as usual" is done every day.

A "failure to state a case" is like offering a circular argument as justification. For example-

you are charged with "robbery". Why? Because you are a robber. That is NOT a sufficient pleading- someone has to claim and testify consistently to 1st hand knowledge as to the ELEMENTS of robbery- so in that case the charge itself is legally defined and needs to be examined in relation to the allegations- the actual testimony.

Another way to look at this is that charges and civil demands etc are just opinions- no one should be convicted of a crime for "being a", but rather on the evidence given by witnesses who state the basis for the charge.

"Failure to state" means a lack of allegations to back up the claim. It's like being presented with a bill for $100 (the charge), with no explanation.

For a case to proceed someone has got to claim an explanation, even if it is false, or wrong, but the face-value of the presentment has to equal the charge made.

So look at the menu (the code) and see if a hamburger really is 2 slices of cheese and a patty, check the bill and see if extra sauce really costs more, and make sure the waitress itemized the order correctly...maybe she threw in some other unsubstantiated french fries. Or called a hamburger a filet mignon! There is no charge for tap water.

Shoonra · #6 03-09-2008, 08:42 AM

"Failure to state a case for which relief can be granted" is a defensive plea used in CIVIL, not criminal, cases.

It is almost invariably the first response by the defense, even if the complaint has been thoroughly drawn up, to give it time to think of a better strategy. In practice, it requires the plaintiff to repeat, perhaps with some amplification, his original complaint. Unless the plaintiff's case is conspicuously defective, this plea hardly ever works.

Charlie Blue · #7 03-09-2008, 10:24 AM

Farmer_Giles_of_Ham and Shoonra, thanks. That is really good info.

Sapiens · #8 03-09-2008, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoonra

" Unless the plaintiff's case is conspicuously defective, this plea hardly ever works.

It seems to work for the Gov. quite well when they are getting sued, regarless of the merits...

Charlie Blue · #9 03-09-2008, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sapiens

It seems to work for the Gov. quite well when they are getting sued, regarless of the merits...

Whenever I file a motion (I'm currently dealing with a Landlord/Tenant case, the landlord being the city) that's usually the first thing they state in their response brief. When reading it, I'm like "WTF"?!!

Because I laid out what the problem is, I'd be wondering what the hell did I miss. I'm not sure if it works for them or not 'cause sometimes I get the motion, sometimes, well most of the time, I don't. The last time I made a motion to re-argue a stipulation in an initial motion that was granted in my favor. It's just that the stipulation will make the motion difficult to come about. Hell, it almost makes it so that you'd ask yourself what the does it do to have the motion granted in the first place but I guess you gotta be greatful for every little thing you get. The re-argue motion was shot down. To tell you the truth, from the way they worded the decision, it was blown clean out of the sky in tiny pieces.

rottweiler · #10 03-09-2008, 01:52 PM

You expatriated from your country and voluntarily joined a foreign jurisdiciton in exchange for entitlements. It is a private foreign corporation. This corporation has sovereignty over you by your consent so the King can do no wrong to you. How can you have standing to sue a King if you are his subject?

You have to become a King yourself, outside of their jurisdiction. That means no more entitlements. You must not look to them as your nanny anymore otherwise you will get spanked a lot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sapiens

It seems to work for the Gov. quite well when they are getting sued, regarless of the merits...