Motion for a More Definite Statement
The Pep Boys, Inc. asserts that it is unable to draft a responsive pleading because Barlow's complaint fails to allege sufficient facts to determine which law it is violating. Thus, the defendant moves this court to order Barlow to file a more definite statement pursuant to Rule 12(e).
Rule 12(e) provides that such a motion may be granted if the complaint is "so vague and ambiguous that [the defendant] cannot reasonably be required to frame a responsive pleading." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e). As noted above, I find that the complaint adequately states a set of specific facts indicating that a Title VII claim is alleged, and discovery is available to better inform the defendant of the contentions. However, the defendant's motion will be granted in that the plaintiff must allege its 1981 claim with greater particularity, if it is seeking such a claim, and should amend his complaint to specify its jurisdictional basis as discussed above.
Rule 8(a) requires that a complaint contain "a demand for judgment for the relief to which [the pleader] deems himself entitled." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Barlow fails to make any such demand. Under Title VII, a plaintiff is entitled to equitable remedies (injunction or declaratory judgment), while Section 1981 authorizes legal remedies (compensatory and, in some cases, punitive damages). See generally, Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, 421 U.S. 454, 44 L. Ed. 2d 295, 95 S. Ct. 1716 (1975) (the Supreme Court emphasized that an individual may make claims for both equitable remedies under Title VII and legal remedies under Section 1981). I find that the complaint does not, beyond a doubt, fail to state a claim for relief; however, the court suggests that the plaintiff should consider amending the complaint in order to specifically state a demand for the relief he seeks.
Further, I note that if Barlow amends his complaint to state a claim pursuant to Section 1981, and demands legal remedies, the right to a jury trial attaches. In order to obtain a jury trial, a timely request must be made in the amended complaint.
Barlow is also advised that pursuant to Rule 5, every motion, paper and subsequent pleading must be served upon the defendant and filed with the court either before service or within a reasonable time thereafter. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5. A "certificate of service" and a "notice" of service must be filed with the court.
Finally, any allegations regarding the union's treatment of Barlow's claims are irrelevant to the claim against the Pep Boys, Inc. If the plaintiff brings a claim against the union, the union must be joined as a defendant and served with the complaint.
An appropriate order follows.
AND NOW, this 4th day of October, 1985, for the reasons set forth in the foregoing Memorandum, it is ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is DENIED.
2. Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state the basis for the court's jurisdiction is DENIED.
3. Defendant's motion for a more definite statement is GRANTED, pursuant to the instructions within the court's Memorandum. Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the date of this Order in which to comply with this Order. Failure to comply with this Order will result in the dismissal of this case.