Constitution, Democrat PaRTY, Dona;ld Trump, Law

Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can be Granted

“Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted is a defense to a legal claim.”

It means that the claimant has failed to present sufficient facts which, if taken as true, would indicate that a violation of law had occurred or that the claimant was entitled to a legal remedy.

This is straight from English and American Common Law, which was speedily being replaced when I was in law school in the 60s. But Mitch McConnell, three years ahead of me in law school, studied under the same regimen, and which, only old farts like us can recount, required more analytical thinking and less running your finger down a list of statutes arranged by category in the state revised statutes.

Or these days, typing in four-five words, then click, then click again, type a word or two again, and click again. And there’d you’d have.

It was the English Common Law that separated England from the rest of Europe by at least 200 years. And it’s partly responsible for why that big vacant acreage in North America between French Canada and Spanish “sur America”, also in about 200 years from its first settlement, would then jump into hyperspace past all its European counterparts, in large part because it took the English Common law to heights unpracticable and unattainable in the aristocratic-backboned English commonwealth.

But in the early 70s it was a common opening plea in civil cases to simply offer the trial judge, on motion day, this simple request to dismiss a plaintiff’s case; that it

Failed to state a claim for which relief could be granted

The judge would look over to the plaintiff’s attorney, “What say you, Counselor?” at which time the lawyer would restate the claim, that 1) there was a legal violation, contract, etc. involved, and 2) there is evidence that will be presented at trial showing the defendant did not do as the law or contract obligated him to do.

Sometimes 10 minutes or less, depending on how versed the judge was in the matter before the court, but always matters of evidence and what the law plainly states.

You’d be surprised how many cases never got past this point in those days.

“Dismissed”, bangs gavel, and the defense lawyer would earn his $100 when he could have made ten times that by never filing the motion to dismiss in the first place.


This Impeachment claim really is that simple, folks. That’s all that needs to be said.

And I think the old school Mitch McConnell knows this….from memory.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *