Free Order on Motion to Strike - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-01160-BTM-WMC

Document 13

Filed 09/03/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 vs. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA ET. AL., Defendant. Defendant Travelers Property Casualty Company of America moves to strike the portion of Plaintiffs' complaint which requests punitive damages in an amount "in excess of $10 million dollars" arguing that Plaintiffs should not be permitted to state the specific amount they seek in punitive damages. The Court DENIES this motion for the following reasons. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), the court may strike from any pleadings any "redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Motions to strike are generally disfavored because they are "often used as delaying tactics, and because of the limited importance of pleadings in federal practice." Buereerong v. Uvawas, 922 F.Supp. 1450, 1478 (C.D.Cal.1996). Furthermore, "motions to strike should not be granted unless it is clear that the matter to be stricken could have no possible bearing on the subject matter of the litigation." Colaprico v. Sun Microsystems, Inc., 758 F.Supp. 1335, 1339 (N.D.Cal.1991). RICHARD C. SMALL ET. AL., Plaintiff, CASE NO. 08CV1160 BTM ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1

08CV1160 BTM

Case 3:08-cv-01160-BTM-WMC

Document 13

Filed 09/03/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

As Defendant contends, California Civil Code § 3295(e) states that "[n]o claim for exemplary damages shall state an amount or amounts. However, "the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern the punitive damages claim procedurally with respect to the adequacy of pleadings. " Clark v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 231 F.R.D. 405, 406-407 (2005). Here, the Court finds that the specified amount of punitive damages is neither redundant, immaterial, impertinent nor scandalous. Although Defendant argues that the amount of punitive damages requested is excessive in light of the amount of compensatory damages required, they do not argue that Plaintiffs are not entitled to these punitive damages as a matter of law. Given the liberal policy that governs pleadings in federal court, the Court declines to strike the portion of Plaintiffs' complaint which requests punitive damages of over $10 million dollars. Defendant's motion to strike is DENIED.

DATED: September 3, 2008

Honorable Barry Ted Moskowitz United States District Judge

2

08CV1160 BTM