Bar Exam — MBE (Multistate Bar Exam)Civil ProcedureEasy
A plaintiff filed a lawsuit in federal court. The defendant believes that the plaintiff's complaint is so vague and ambiguous that the defendant cannot reasonably prepare a response. What is the most appropriate procedural mechanism for the defendant to seek clarification of the complaint?
- AMotion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Rule 12(b)(6))
- BMotion for a More Definite Statement (Rule 12(e))
- CMotion for Summary Judgment (Rule 56)
- DMotion to Strike (Rule 12(f))
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: B. Motion for a More Definite Statement (Rule 12(e))
A motion for a more definite statement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e) is the appropriate mechanism when a pleading is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably prepare a response. It asks the court to order the opposing party to provide more clarity.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. A Rule 12(b)(6) motion challenges whether the complaint, even if clear, states a *legal* claim, not its vagueness.
- C. A motion for summary judgment (Rule 56) is filed after discovery, asserting there's no genuine dispute of material fact, not to clarify a vague complaint.
- D. A motion to strike (Rule 12(f)) is used to remove redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter from a pleading, or an insufficient defense, not to clarify vague allegations.
Motion for a More Definite Statement (FRCP 12(e))
A party may move for a more definite statement if a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably prepare a response. The motion must point out the defects complained of and the details desired.
- Available only if the pleading is truly vague or ambiguous.
- Typically used when an answer cannot be framed.
- Used before filing an answer.
Memory trick: Pleading Problems: Dismiss, Clarify, or Strike.