Modern Legal Challenge: Abatement
1. What Is Abatement?
At common law, a plea in abatement was a procedural defense raised to challenge defects in the initiation of a case. It did not go to the merits of the dispute but instead addressed errors such as:
-
Improper service of process,
-
Lack of jurisdiction over the defendant,
-
Defects in the summons or complaint,
-
Misjoinder or misnaming of parties.
If successful, abatement could result in dismissal or correction of the defect before the case moved forward.
2. Abatement Today
Modern courts no longer use the old common-law writs of abatement. Instead, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) and state rules provide mechanisms to raise the same issues through pretrial motions.
Relevant rules include:
-
Rule 12(b)(1): Lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
-
Rule 12(b)(2): Lack of personal jurisdiction.
-
Rule 12(b)(3): Improper venue.
-
Rule 12(b)(4): Insufficient process (defects in summons).
-
Rule 12(b)(5): Insufficient service of process.
-
Rule 12(b)(6): Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
By filing a Rule 12 motion before answering the complaint, a defendant can force the court to address these issues first.
3. How to Properly Use Abatement Principles
If you believe there are defects in the case filed against you:
-
Do Not Enter a Plea or Answer Yet
-
Filing an answer or plea may waive certain defenses. Raise jurisdictional and process objections first.
-
File a Motion to Dismiss or Motion to Quash
-
Clearly state which defect you are asserting (improper service, lack of jurisdiction, etc.).
-
Support your motion with affidavits or exhibits if needed.
-
Demand Proper Process
-
If the summons or complaint is defective, request that the court dismiss or require the plaintiff to refile properly.
-
This enforces the constitutional right to due process of law — fair notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
4. Traffic and Minor Offenses Context
In cases like traffic citations or minor infractions, abatement-type arguments may arise if:
-
The citation was not properly issued,
-
The summons lacks the necessary signature, seal, or statutory authority,
-
The prosecution fails to provide sufficient information about the charge (lack of notice of the “nature and cause” of the accusation).
Here, the proper motion would be a motion to dismiss for insufficient process or a demand for a bill of particulars if the charge is unclear.
5. Caution Against Misuse
Courts will not entertain arguments that attempt to deny the existence of government authority, claim “corporate fiction,” or allege undefined “emergency powers.” These theories have been repeatedly rejected as frivolous.
The strongest, legally recognized approach is to focus strictly on procedural defects: Was service proper? Does the court have jurisdiction? Is the complaint legally sufficient?
6. Conclusion
Abatement remains a valuable principle — not as a separate “sovereign” tool, but as a procedural safeguard embedded in modern court rules. By raising defects in process before responding to the merits, a defendant preserves their rights and ensures that due process is observed.
***Sample Motion to Dismiss (Abatement Principles Applied)***
***Sample Motion to Dismiss (Abatement Principles Applied)***
IN THE [NAME OF COURT]
[COUNTY], [STATE]
[COUNTY], [STATE]
[Plaintiff],
Plaintiff,
Plaintiff,
v.
[Defendant],
Defendant.
Defendant.
Case No: [insert case number]
MOTION TO DISMISS FOR DEFECTIVE PROCESS AND LACK OF JURISDICTION
Defendant, appearing specially and not generally, respectfully moves this Court to dismiss the above-captioned matter pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the [State/Federal] Rules of Civil Procedure, on the grounds that the Plaintiff has failed to perfect process and that this Court lacks proper jurisdiction. In support thereof, Defendant states as follows:
I. INSUFFICIENT PROCESS AND SERVICE
-
The summons and/or complaint fails to comply with the procedural requirements of [cite state rule or FRCP 4], rendering service defective.
-
Proper service of process is a jurisdictional prerequisite. Without valid service, no court acquires authority over the defendant. (Murphy Bros. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc., 526 U.S. 344, 350 (1999)).
II. LACK OF SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION
-
Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the cause of action falls within this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. Federal and state constitutions require jurisdiction to be affirmatively established before adjudication.
-
Jurisdiction cannot be presumed; it must appear affirmatively on the face of the record. (Ex parte McCardle, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 506, 514 (1868)).
III. FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
-
Even if jurisdiction were proper, Plaintiff’s pleading fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6). The complaint does not allege sufficient facts to establish each element of the cause of action.
-
Bare conclusions and defective pleadings cannot sustain an action. (Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)).
IV. PRESERVATION OF RIGHTS
-
Defendant raises these objections prior to any responsive pleading in order to preserve all constitutional and procedural rights, including the right to due process of law as guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:
-
Dismiss this action in its entirety for insufficient process and lack of jurisdiction;
-
Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
Date: ___________
[Defendant’s Name]
[Defendant’s Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
[Phone / Email]
[Defendant’s Address]
[City, State, ZIP]
[Phone / Email]
Notes for Use:
-
If this is criminal traffic court, the equivalent motion would be titled Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Process and Lack of Jurisdiction under the state’s criminal procedure rules.
-
Replace the citations with your state’s procedural rule numbers if this is not federal.
-
Always attach supporting exhibits (e.g., copy of defective summons or citation).
