Peacock Tales

Volume 18, Number 1 · January 2008

Early Dismissal of Cases (Part 1)

by Frank Adams

One of the first reactions a person often has to learning that he or she has been sued is their belief that there is no basis for the suit, and that a judge should dismiss it immediately. A client often asks, "how do we get this thrown out of court?" Having a case "thrown out" or dismissed prior to trial is not easy and is often unsuccessful. That is due to the concept that a litigant should have his day in court. The state Rules of Civil Procedure follow that concept. Although not easy, it is not impossible. There are a few methods by which a defendant can seek the pretrial dismissal of a case. One is through the filing of preliminary objections to the complaint.

Preliminary objections are the first opportunity, and are filed in response to a complaint in lieu of filing an "answer" to the complaint. Only certain issues are allowed to be raised in preliminary objections. These include jurisdictional issues and also an argument that the allegations made against the defendant are not sufficient to actually state a case against that defendant under Pennsylvania law. When preliminary objections question whether the complaint is sufficient, the court's ability to dismiss the case is limited. The court must accept as true all the facts set forth in the complaint, as well as any inferences that could reasonably be supported by those facts. The plaintiff has sworn that the facts are true to his knowledge, under penalty of prosecution (the same as a defendant is required to do in answering a complaint).

The judge's review of the case is limited because no one has yet had an opportunity to properly gather and offer evidence. The court is limited to looking at the complaint, and asking itself: "assuming all the things said in the complaint are true, could the plaintiff have a case against that defendant?" If the answer is "yes," the case cannot be dismissed. If the answer is "maybe" or "possibly" or even "very unlikely, but possible" the case cannot be dismissed. Only where there is no doubt can the judge sustain the objections and dismiss the complaint.

Even when the answer is a clear "no," the court allows the plaintiff to file an amended complaint to correct the deficiency. Often this can lead to the rather duplicative and seemingly redundant task of again filing preliminary objections to the amended complaint. The same rules apply to the judge, who is asked to determine for a second time, if the preliminary objections should be sustained. If there is doubt, the case must move forward. Most cases usually do at this stage of the lawsuit.

If no preliminary objections are filed, or if they are overruled, the defendant may respond by filing a pleading, aptly named, an "answer," admitting or denying the claims in the complaint, and a "new matter" raising additional facts. The plantiff must file a "reply to the new matter." Once the pleading process is complete, another opportunity to have the case dismissed arises. This is by filing a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

In determining how to rule on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the judge is again limited in the same manner as with preliminary objections. The court has to accept the allegations of the plaintiff as true, and only those facts that the plaintiff admits in his pleadings can be considered against him. The court must ask itself if the claims in the pleadings are sufficient to sustain a lawsuit.

There really is no difference between the standard for granting preliminary objections and a motion for judgment on the pleadings, except that now the judge may have the benefit of some facts that have been admitted by the plaintiff. There still has not been any opportunity to collect and present evidence to the court.

In the next edition of this newsletter we will continue with other ways a court case may be terminated prior to a full-blown trial.