The following excerpt is from East v. Seideman, 107 F.3d 15 (9th Cir. 1997):
The district court provided East with specific guidance on how to amend her complaint to satisfy Rule 8's pleading requirements. Despite the district court's guidance, East's second amended complaint is incomprehensible. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing East's second amended complaint. See McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177-78 (9th Cir.1996).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.