Checking Up on Mr. Chow.

An inquisitive reader asks, “what’s up with the Mr. Chow lawsuit”?My answer — what am I, Action Line?Still, my job here is to inform, so let’s a peek…

What do you know, Mr. Chow (represented by Alan Kluger) has filed a response to the defendant’s motion to dismiss, and it contains this blockbuster statement about current federal pleading standards:

Inexplicably, Defendants suggest that Plaintiffs should have attached their evidentiary proof in support of their claims to the complaint itself, as they pointedly emphasize that “Plaintiffs[] fail[] to attach any documents in support of its [sic] claims” to the Amended Complaint. See DE 16 p. 4 (emphasis in original). This suggestion flies in the face of the fundamental principle that the purpose of the complaint is simply to place Defendants on notice of the claims against them, not to prove up Plaintiffs’ case at the inception of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and related discussion below.

Alan, someone has not been reading my blog!

Notice pleading is so 2007.

BTW, congrats to Alan for making the 2009 Chambers USA top lawyers list (page 759), which even includes a mention of Kluger’s “world-class collection of Latin American Art dating from 1945 to the present.”

(I am not making that last part up.)

The motion to dismiss is now fully briefed and awaiting a ruling from Judge Hoeveler (in other words — get to work, Barbara!)