2002 U.S. Code
Title 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
TITLE 28 - APPENDIX
RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS
Form 3 - Complaint on a Promissory Note

View Metadata

Form 3. Complaint on a Promissory Note

1. Allegation of jurisdiction.

2. Defendant on or about June 1, 1935, executed and delivered to plaintiff a promissory note [in the following words and figures: (here set out the note verbatim)]; [a copy of which is hereto annexed as Exhibit A]; [whereby defendant promised to pay to plaintiff or order on June 1, 1936 the sum of ______ dollars with interest thereon at the rate of six percent. per annum].

3. Defendant owes to plaintiff the amount of said note and interest.

Wherefore plaintiff demands judgment against defendant for the sum of ______ dollars, interest, and costs.

Signed: ____________________________,

Attorney for Plaintiff.

Address: __________________________

Notes

1. The pleader may use the material in one of the three sets of brackets. His choice will depend upon whether he desires to plead the document verbatim, or by exhibit, or according to its legal effect.

2. Under the rules free joinder of claims is permitted. See rules 8(e) and 18. Consequently the claims set forth in each and all of the following forms may be joined with this complaint or with each other. Ordinarily each claim should be stated in a separate division of the complaint, and the divisions should be designated as counts successively numbered. In particular the rules permit alternative and inconsistent pleading. See Form 10.

(As amended Jan. 21, 1963, eff. July 1, 1963.)

Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1963 Amendment

At various places, these Forms [Forms 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 21] allege or refer to damages of “ten thousand dollars, interest, and costs,” or the like. The Forms were written at a time when the jurisdictional amount in ordinary “diversity” and “Federal question” cases was an amount in excess of ,000, exclusive of interest and costs, so the illustrative amounts set out in the Forms were adequate for jurisdictional purposes. However, U.S.C. Title 28, §1331 (Federal question; amount in controversy; costs) and §1332 (Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs), as amended by Pub. Law 85–554, 72 Stat. 415, July 25, 1958, now require that the amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, be in excess of ,000. Accordingly the Forms are misleading. They are amended at appropriate places by deleting the stated dollar amount and substituting a blank, to be properly filled in by the pleader.