I must admit I’m no fan of motions for judgment on the pleadings. Although I can appreciate their merit in certain situations, oftentimes they are used like “gotcha” moves in a chess match, preying upon technical or innocent errors that are not usually very substantive and which can (and should) be readily fixed in an amended pleading. For that reason they can be timewasters, and thus frequently pointless.
Judge King seems to have encountered one of the type I’m complaining about:
(1) We have a premature “shotgun pleading” allegation that winds up making you look bad (instead of your opponent); and
(2) We have an Albert Brooksian “look only at paragraph
22 72″ argument that asks the Court to ignore entirely the rest of the well-pled allegations in the complaint.
Other than that, I think the motion could be described as a qualified success.