With regard to Defendant's breach of contract and negligence claims, Defendant submits that the proofs will demonstrate that Plaintiff demanded payment from Defendant well in excess of the agreed upon amounts. Furthermore, the evidence will demonstrate that Plaintiff refused to perform work he had agreed to perform, and performed certain work in a negligent manner requiring corrective work that was paid for by Defendant. In response to Defendant's argument, Plaintiff points out that the rules of pleading are designed to put the parties on notice of the existence of substantial claims with an articulable factual basis. Litigants are not allowed to plead a bald claim for relief in the hope of developing a factual basis through the legal process. Such claims are subject to dismissal.
Dismissal promotes fairness to the litigants and the efficiency of the judicial system.
Plaintiff argues that Defendant provides no factual substantiation for her claims. Rather, Defendant takes the position that she is entitled to ignore well- established rules of pleading if she can assert that relevant information can be developed at later stages in the action. This is precisely the situation the rules of pleading are intended to avoid. Here, Plaintiff argues, even in response to a motion to strike pleadings, Defendant offers no facts supporting her claims. Her attorneys indicate what discovery and evidence will show, but the recitation lacks the one item that must be included in Defendant's pleadings - facts.