Heidingsfelder v. Ameriprise Auto & Home Insurance

Background

The plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint after the court dismissed their original complaint under Rule 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal when a complaint does not adequately state a legal claim. The court had allowed amendment and identified several problems, including failure to distinguish among the four defendants, failure to allege facts establishing a fiduciary relationship, and failure to plausibly show that the defendants breached a contractual obligation.

The first amended complaint was 172 pages long, nearly four times the length of the original complaint. The court found that much of the additional length came from repeated sentences and paragraphs, lengthy legal standards, and extensive case citations. The court stated that the complaint lacked improved factual allegations addressing the deficiencies previously identified.

Ruling

The court concluded that the first amended complaint still did not contain new facts sufficient to state plausible claims and dismissed it for failing to comply with Rule 8, which requires a short and plain statement of the claims. The court also noted that the complaint did not plausibly allege that the defendants breached an insurance contract or misled the plaintiffs about coverage limits.

The court considered dismissing the case with prejudice, meaning the claims could not be refiled, because the plaintiffs had already had two opportunities to state a plausible claim. Instead, the court allowed one final opportunity to amend. A second amended complaint consistent with the order and the earlier dismissal order could be filed by July 13, 2021. The court barred adding new parties or claims without prior approval and stated that failure to meet the deadline or the order’s requirements would result in dismissal of the case with prejudice.