Legal Definitions - argumentative pleading

An argumentative pleading refers to a formal written document filed with a court that, instead of simply stating the facts and legal basis for a party's claim or defense, includes arguments, interpretations, or conclusions that should typically be reserved for later stages of a lawsuit, such as motions or trial. Pleadings are primarily intended to inform the court and the opposing party about the factual allegations and legal theories involved, not to persuade them through argument at this initial stage.

Here are some examples illustrating an argumentative pleading:

• Imagine a plaintiff filing a Complaint (a type of pleading) that states: "The defendant's actions were not only negligent but also clearly motivated by a malicious intent to cause harm, demonstrating a shocking disregard for public safety, and therefore, the court must find them fully liable."

  This is an argumentative pleading because it goes beyond stating the facts (e.g., "the defendant acted negligently") and instead includes persuasive language ("clearly motivated by malicious intent," "shocking disregard," "the court must find them fully liable") that interprets the facts and draws conclusions. While these points might be argued later in a motion or at trial, they are inappropriate for the initial pleading, which should focus on presenting the factual allegations and the legal claims.

• Consider a defendant filing an Answer (another type of pleading) to a lawsuit, stating: "The plaintiff's entire case is a frivolous attempt to extort money from an innocent party, and any reasonable person can see that their claims lack any factual basis whatsoever."

  This is an argumentative pleading because the defendant is not just denying the plaintiff's allegations or asserting specific defenses. Instead, they are making a broad, persuasive statement about the plaintiff's motives ("frivolous attempt to extort money") and the perceived weakness of their case ("any reasonable person can see that their claims lack any factual basis"). These are arguments about the merits of the case that belong in a legal brief or oral argument, not in the formal response that outlines the defendant's factual positions and legal defenses.

• Suppose a party files a Counterclaim (a pleading where a defendant sues the plaintiff) asserting: "The plaintiff's egregious breach of contract caused such severe financial devastation that it unequivocally proves their untrustworthy business practices, warranting substantial punitive damages."

  This example is argumentative because it uses strong, interpretive language ("egregious breach," "severe financial devastation," "unequivocally proves their untrustworthy business practices") to characterize the plaintiff's conduct and its impact. While the defendant can certainly claim breach of contract and seek damages, the pleading should focus on the specific facts of the breach and the resulting losses, rather than making sweeping conclusions about the plaintiff's character or the certainty of their liability and the appropriate remedy, which are matters for argument and proof later in the litigation process.