United States Ninth Circuit

The fact that an amended complaint, or answer, contains an allegation that is apparently contrary to an earlier iteration of the same pleading does not necessarily render the later pleading a sham. Unless there is a showing that the party acted in bad faith, inconsistent allegations are simply not a basis for striking a pleading under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Appellate Information

• Argued 10/15/2007
• Decided 12/18/2007
• Published 12/18/2007

Judges

• KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:, Before:  ALEX KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, A. WALLACE TASHIMA and M. MARGARET McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Richard E. Drooyan, Mark H. Epstein, Katherine K. Huang and E. Dorsey Heine, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for the plaintiff-appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Kathleen M. Wood and Nicholas P. Connon, Connon Wood Sheidemantle LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for the defendant-appellee.