Two different pleadings, two different standards. It can go either way. Let's keep our fingers crossed. Now come Plaintiffs Theodore Brown, James Linnehan, and the as-yet unidentified Jane and John Does and move to strike Defendant Eli Newberger's Answer and Motion to Dismiss. When a Court determines, . . .
Defendant is deemed to have admitted all well pleaded allegations in the complaint.
It was said in Hawkins v. Crook , qua supra , and quoted in 2 Eq. Cas. The strict analogy of this proceeding in actions of law to a general decree pro confesso in equity in favor of the complainant, with a reference to a master to take a necessary account, or to assess unliquidated damages, is obvious and striking. The defendant must establish his excusable neglect, and this he has not yet done. In sum, neither Newberger nor his defense counsel is excused from compliance with the relevant rules of substantive and proce- dural law. Rules of court are indispensable to the orderly and efficient conduct of a court's business.