NOTES TO RULE 8
HISTORY: (Amended July 1, 1966; Aug. 1, 1987)
Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules.
Note to Subdivision (a).
See former Equity Rules 25 (Bill of Complaint--Contents), and 30 (Answer--Contents--Counterclaim). Compare 2 Ind Stat Ann (Burns, 1933) §§ 2-1004, 2-1015; 2 Ohio Gen Code Ann (Page, 1926) §§ 11305, 11314; Utah Rev Stat Ann (1933), §§ 104-7-2, 104-9-1.
See Rule 19(c) for the requirement of a statement in a claim for relief of the names of persons who ought to be parties and the reason for their omission.
See Rule 23(b) for particular requirements as to the complaint in a secondary action by shareholders.
Note to Subdivision (b).
1. This rule supersedes the methods of pleading prescribed in USC, Title 19, § 508 (Persons making seizures pleading general issue and proving special matter); USC, Title 35, former § 40d (Proving under general issue, upon notice, that a statement in application for an extended patent is not true), former § 69 (now § 282) (Pleading and proof in actions for infringement) and similar statutes.
2. This rule is, in part, former Equity Rule 30 (Answer--Contents--Counterclaim), with the matter on denials largely from the Connecticut practice. See Conn Practice Book (1934) §§ 107, 108, and 122; Conn Gen Stat (1930) §§ 5508--5514. Compare the English practice, English Rules Under the Judicature Act (The Annual Practice, 1937) O. 19, r r 17--20.
Note to Subdivision (c).
This follows substantially English Rules Under the Judicature Act (The Annual Practice, 1937) O. 19, r 15 and NYCPA (1937) § 242, with "surprise" omitted in this rule.
Note to Subdivision (d).
The first sentence is similar to former Equity Rule 30 (Answer--Contents--Counterclaim). For the second sentence see former Equity Rule 31 (Reply--When Required--When Cause at Issue). This is similar to English Rules Under the Judicature Act (The Annual Practice, 1937) O. 19, r r 13, 18; and to the practice in the States.
Note to Subdivision (e).
This rule is an elaboration upon former Equity Rule 30 (Answer--Contents--Counterclaim), plus a statement of the actual practice under some codes. Compare also former Equity Rule 18 (Pleadings--Technical Forms Abrogated). See Clark, Code Pleading (1928), pp 171--4, 432--5; Hankin, Alternative and Hypothetical Pleading (1924), 33 Yale L J 365.
Note to Subdivision (f).
A provision of like import is of frequent occurrence in the codes. Ill Rev Stat (1937) ch 110, § 157(3); 2 Minn Stat (Mason, 1927) § 9266; NY CPA (1937) § 275; 2 ND Comp Laws Ann (1913) § 7458.
Notes of Advisory Committee on 1966 amendments to Rules.
The change here is consistent with the broad purposes of unification.
Notes of Advisory Committee on 1987 amendments to Rules.
The amendments are technical. No substantive change is intended.