Larry Davis v. Ruby Foods, Inc., Doing Business as Dunkin' Donuts, Inc., and Baskin-Robbins, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that when the complaint otherwise satisfied Rule 8, inclusion of irrelevant material did not justify dismissal of the suit
• holding that a district court abuses its discretion by “dismiss[ing] a complaint merely because it contains repetitious and irrelevant matter, a disposable husk around a core of proper pleading”
• holding that a district court is not “authorized to dismiss a complaint merely because it contains repetitious and irrelevant matter, a disposable husk around a core of proper pleading”
• finding that “dismissal of a complaint on the ground that it is unintelligible is unexceptionable.”
• stating that motions to strike where the material is not 27 “actually prejudicial” “are what give ‘motion practice’ a deservedly bad name.”
• suggesting that any claim that may survive a Rule 12(b)(6) challenge meets the pleading requirements of Rule 8

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).