(a) Vague or Ambiguous Pleadings. If a pleading is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably be required to frame a response he may move for a more definite statement.
R 3024.Motion to correct pleadings
Article 30. Remedies and Pleading · Last amended 1963 · Last verified July 21, 2026
In one sentenceGives a party two targeted tools against a badly drafted pleading — a motion for a more definite statement when it's too vague or ambiguous to answer, and a motion to strike scandalous or prejudicial matter — each on its own tight timetable.
Full Text of CPLR 3024
(b) Scandalous or Prejudicial Matter. A party may move to strike any scandalous or prejudicial matter unnecessarily inserted in a pleading.
(c) Time Limits; Pleading After Disposition. A notice of motion under this rule shall be served within twenty days after service of the challenged pleading. If the motion is denied, the responsive pleading shall be served within ten days after service of notice of entry of the order and, if it is granted, an amended pleading complying with the order shall be served within that time.
Plain-English Summary
CPLR 3024 addresses form problems in a pleading, as distinct from the substantive defects that CPLR 3211 and the particularity rules elsewhere in this article cover. Subdivision (a) lets a party move for a more definite statement where a pleading is so vague or ambiguous that a reasonable response can't be framed — rather than guessing at what's being alleged and risking an answer that misses the mark. Subdivision (b) lets a party move to strike scandalous or prejudicial matter unnecessarily inserted into a pleading. That ground is narrower than it once was: older grounds for striking material as sham, frivolous, irrelevant, redundant, or merely unnecessary were dropped, on the view that only matter that is scandalous or prejudicial in fact causes real harm.
Subdivision (c) sets a compact schedule. A motion under this rule must be served within twenty days after the challenged pleading is served. If the motion is denied, the responsive pleading is due within ten days after notice of entry of the order denying it; if the motion is granted, an amended pleading complying with the order is due within that same ten days.
The rule's narrowness is deliberate. New York's drafters concluded that little is gained by turning pleading disputes into fights over form, and CPLR 3026's command to construe pleadings liberally and ignore non-prejudicial defects reflects the same judgment: this rule exists for pleadings that truly can't be answered or that carry real prejudice, not for pleadings that read as inartful.
Frequently Asked Questions
What can I do if the opposing pleading is too vague to respond to?
CPLR 3024(a) lets you move for a more definite statement when a pleading is so vague or ambiguous that you can't reasonably be required to frame a response.
Can I strike scandalous or prejudicial material from a pleading in New York?
Yes. CPLR 3024(b) allows a motion to strike any scandalous or prejudicial matter that was unnecessarily inserted into a pleading.
How long do I have to move against a vague or prejudicial pleading?
CPLR 3024(c) requires the notice of motion to be served within twenty days after service of the challenged pleading.
What happens after a motion for a more definite statement is granted?
The amended pleading complying with the court's order must be served within ten days after notice of entry of the order, under CPLR 3024(c).
What happens if my motion under CPLR 3024 is denied?
The responsive pleading is then due within ten days after notice of entry of the order denying the motion.
Can I move to strike a pleading just because it's poorly worded?
Not under CPLR 3024(b) alone — that subdivision reaches scandalous or prejudicial matter unnecessarily inserted, not pleadings that are merely awkward or inartful.
Advisory Committee Notes
This rule reflects a basic judgment that nothing is gained in the way of speedy and accurate disposition of a case by disputes over the formal propriety of the allegations. This is the same judgment that underlies the requirement in CPLR § 3026 that nonprejudicial defects are to be ignored in construing pleadings. Of course, shoddy pleading should be discouraged. There are certain corrective motions which are necessary. These are contained in this rule. A pleading must inform the opponent of the case against him with sufficient clarity to enable him to answer. To that end subd (a) of this rule adopts, with minor language changes, the grounds for a motion for more definite statement as formulated in Federal rule 12(e). The subject was formerly covered by RCP 102. Of the many types of matter that may be stricken according to the traditional formulation of the codes, only scandalous or prejudicial allegations do any serious harm, and even such matters should not be removed from the case if they are relevant. Subd (b) of this rule departs from former RCP 103 requiring that allegations must be “unnecessarily inserted” as well as scandalous or prejudicial to warrant striking, and in omitting any provision for striking allegations that are sham, frivolous, irrelevant, redundant, repetitious, unnecessary or impertinent. The latter defects alone do not appear to warrant a separate motion.
The time limitations of subd (c) of this rule are based upon CPA § 283 and RCP 105.
Amendment History
Add, L 1962, ch 308, eff Sept 1, 1963.
Source & verification. Provision text, History, and Advisory
Committee Notes are reproduced verbatim from the Consolidated Laws of New York.
Last verified July 21, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: motion for a more definite statement New Yorkmotion to strike scandalous matter New Yorkhow to respond to a vague complaint New YorkNew York pleading motion deadlines