Dioguardi v. Durning 139 F.2d 774 (1944).

Properly written pleadings

Dioguadi (P), a man of limited English abilities, wrote and filed his own complaints alleging a series of grievances against the Collector of Customs at the Port of New York which arose out of his efforts to import merchandise from Italy. The complaint was sketchy on what the cause of action was but it appear to be something relating to being the first bidder at an auction at the price for which the goods were sold and not being allowed to be the buyer, not getting a discount on the goods from the catalogue price, and not allowing P to buy at a discount from the catalogue price just before the auction sale.

The District Court dismissed with leave for P to amend his complaint on the motion of the US Attorney on the ground that P's complaint "fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action." On the D's motion for dismissal on the same ground as before, the court made a final judgement dismissing the amended complaint. The P appealed to this court with another amended complaint.

Is P's complaint sufficient to comply with the FRCP?

As long as the complaint states a possible claim it is acceptable even if it is not perfectly written.

This complaint complies with the new rule of civil procedure that the complaint be a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief."

P is entitled to his day in court. Just because his complaint was not perfect is not a reason to not hear the case.

There has been a bunch of unfavorable commentary on this case. One point is that this case seems to allow a P to file a complaint which is not very substantive. As long as the complaint does not make allegations that under no circumstances can have relief in law, the D cannot show the pleader is not entitled to relief.

P lost his case when it went to trial.

The term "notice pleading" is used although it does not appear in the Rules.