- 12 -
Fono v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 680, 694 (1982), affd. without
published opinion 749 F.2d 37 (9th Cir. 1984). That intent is
clearly expressed in the language of the release and pretrial
order. We do not need to look further.
We also find persuasive the lack of any reference to
personal injuries in the amended complaint and/or pretrial
order. Petitioners never made a claim for or reference to
personal injuries suffered on the job in either. The complaint
contained only a challenge to the exempt status of certain
State employees and asserted those employees’ rights to receive
overtime compensation. Though notice pleading is allowed by
the Kansas Code of Civil Procedure, Rules Civ. Proc., Kan.
Stat. Ann. sec. 60-208(e)(1) (1994), the short plain statement
of the claim is sufficient only if it gives the defendant “fair
notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the ground upon
which it rests.” Rinsley v. Frydman, 559 P.2d 334, 338 (Kan.
1977) (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)).
Though it is not necessary to spell out a legal theory of
relief in the pleadings, the opponent must be apprised of the
facts that entitle the plaintiff to relief. See Oller v.
Kincheloe’s, Inc., 681 P.2d 630, 637 (Kan. 1984). Petitioners
alleged no facts that provide even a hint of personal injury or
illness. Petitioners attempt to justify the lack of facts
about injury or illness by claiming that the pretrial order had
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011