Stanard v. Nygren

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying under Rules 8(d)(1) and 10(b) plaintiffs' motion seeking leave to file second amended complaint alleging RICO and section 1983 actions arising out of contention that defendants forced plaintiffs to hire off-duty deputy sheriffs as security for plaintiffs' private outdoor stage events, as well as determining that plaintiffs' complaint should be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiffs had failed on three occasions to comply with basic pleading rules requiring concise statements of claims in separately numbered paragraphs. Record also showed that plaintiff's allegations were unintelligible, as well as vague and conclusory, that Dist. Ct. gave explicit directions as to how to cure said pleading deficiencies, and that plaintiff's counsel essentially ignored said directions and repeated many pleading defects in proposed amended complaints.