Legal Definitions - plea not pure

A "plea not pure" describes a specific type of legal response made by a party in a lawsuit. It is often referred to as a "confession and avoidance" plea. In this kind of response, the party acknowledges or "confesses" to the factual claims made by the opposing side. However, they immediately follow this admission by introducing new facts or legal arguments that "avoid" the legal consequences of those admitted facts.

Essentially, a party using a plea not pure is saying, "Yes, what you claim happened is true, but there's more to the story, and these additional facts or legal reasons mean I shouldn't be held responsible or that your claim isn't valid." It is distinct from a simple denial of the claims or a full admission without any defense.

• Example 1: Contract Dispute

  Imagine a software development company (the defendant) is sued by a client (the plaintiff) for failing to deliver a custom application by the agreed-upon deadline. The software company files a response stating, "We admit that the application was not delivered by the original deadline of June 1st (confession). However, the client repeatedly requested significant changes to the project scope and features throughout May, which required extensive re-coding and testing, making the original deadline impossible to meet (avoidance)."

  This illustrates a plea not pure because the company admits the core fact of missing the deadline but introduces new facts (client-requested changes) to justify or excuse their failure, aiming to avoid liability for breach of contract.

• Example 2: Trespass

  Consider a homeowner (the plaintiff) who sues a neighbor (the defendant) for trespass, claiming the neighbor entered their property without permission. The neighbor responds, "I admit that I entered your property on Tuesday (confession). However, I did so because your dog had escaped its leash and was running into the street towards oncoming traffic, and I was attempting to retrieve it to prevent harm to the dog and potential accidents (avoidance)."

  Here, the neighbor admits to the act of entering the property but provides a justification (necessity to prevent harm) to avoid being found legally liable for trespass.

• Example 3: Debt Collection

  Suppose a bank (the plaintiff) sues a borrower (the defendant) for defaulting on a loan. The borrower responds, "I admit that I signed the loan agreement and have not made the last three payments (confession). However, the loan agreement contained an unconscionable interest rate that violates state usury laws, making the agreement unenforceable (avoidance)."

  This is a plea not pure because the borrower admits to the factual basis of the debt but introduces a legal argument (unconscionable interest rate, usury laws) to avoid the legal obligation to repay the loan under its original terms.