Legal Definitions - plead over

In legal contexts, to plead over means to respond to the substance of a legal document filed by an opposing party, without first raising an objection to a defect or flaw within that document itself. Essentially, if you address the core claims or arguments of a legal filing without pointing out its procedural or technical shortcomings, you are said to have "pleaded over."

The significant consequence of pleading over is that the party doing so often waives their right to object to that specific defect later in the legal process. The court may interpret the act of responding to the substance as an implicit acceptance that the document, despite its flaw, is sufficient for the case to proceed.

• Example 1: Responding to an Incomplete Complaint

  Imagine a situation where a plaintiff files a lawsuit (a "complaint") alleging breach of contract, but fails to include a crucial detail, such as the specific date the contract was allegedly breached, which is required by court rules. Instead of filing a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of specificity or asking the court to compel the plaintiff to provide more details, the defendant simply files an "answer" denying the breach and addressing the merits of the plaintiff's claims. In this scenario, the defendant has pleaded over the defect. By responding to the substance of the complaint without first objecting to the missing date, the defendant might lose the ability to later argue that the complaint was legally insufficient due to that omission.

• Example 2: Addressing a Procedurally Flawed Motion

  Consider a scenario where one party files a "motion" (a request to the court for a specific action) that violates a minor procedural rule, such as using the wrong font size or exceeding the page limit specified by local court rules. The opposing party, instead of filing an objection to the motion based on these procedural flaws, files a response that directly argues against the legal points raised in the motion. Here, the opposing party has pleaded over the procedural defects. By engaging with the substance of the motion, they may have waived their right to later ask the court to strike the motion solely because of its formatting or length issues.

• Example 3: Answering a Vague Allegation

  Suppose a complaint includes a very general accusation of fraud, but provides no specific facts or details about when, where, or how the alleged fraud occurred, which is typically required for fraud claims. Rather than filing a motion to dismiss the fraud claim for failing to state a claim with particularity (i.e., not providing enough detail), the defendant files an answer that simply denies the vague fraud allegation. The defendant has pleaded over the lack of specificity. They might find it harder later to argue that the fraud claim should be dismissed because it was too vague from the outset, as they chose to respond to it directly.