Bar Exam (Next Generation) Quiz: Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings

12 questions · exam conditions

0:00

Motion For Judgment On The PleadingsQuestion 1 of 12

Plaza Properties sued Cityside Transit for breach of a license agreement. Plaza's complaint quoted paragraph 7 of the agreement, alleging Cityside promised to maintain a bus shelter. The complete agreement was attached to the complaint as Exhibit A. Cityside answered, denying breach. Cityside then moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that Exhibit A contained an integration clause and an express disclaimer of any obligation to maintain shelters, which the complaint's selective quotation omitted. Plaza did not dispute the authenticity of Exhibit A.

Rule 10(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides: "A copy of a written instrument that is an exhibit to a pleading is a part of the pleading for all purposes." Rule 12(c) provides: "After the pleadings are closed—but early enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings."

In deciding Cityside's motion, how should the court treat Exhibit A?

It may consider Exhibit A as part of the pleadings, and if the exhibit's disclaimer forecloses Plaza's claim, grant the motion.

It must exclude Exhibit A because a Rule 12(c) motion is decided solely on the face of the complaint, not on attachments to it.

It may consider Exhibit A only if it first converts the motion to a motion for summary judgment, because exhibits are matters outside the pleadings.

It may consider Exhibit A solely to determine whether Plaza had notice of the disclaimer, but cannot base judgment on it.

← Back to quizzes

Bar Exam (Next Generation) Quiz

Bar Exam (Next Generation) Quiz: Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings

Practice Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings in Bar Exam (Next Generation) with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Bar Exam (Next Generation).

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

In deciding Cityside's motion, how should the court treat Exhibit A?

It may consider Exhibit A as part of the pleadings, and if the exhibit's disclaimer forecloses Plaza's claim, grant the motion. (correct answer)
It must exclude Exhibit A because a Rule 12(c) motion is decided solely on the face of the complaint, not on attachments to it.
It may consider Exhibit A only if it first converts the motion to a motion for summary judgment, because exhibits are matters outside the pleadings.
It may consider Exhibit A solely to determine whether Plaza had notice of the disclaimer, but cannot base judgment on it.

Explanation: Whenever you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings, remember Rule 10(c): any written instrument attached as an exhibit is "part of the pleading for all purposes." Here, Plaza attached the complete agreement as Exhibit A, so that document is not outside the pleadings — it is the complaint itself for purposes of Rule 12(c). The court may therefore read Exhibit A in full, including the integration clause and disclaimer, and if the disclaimer forecloses Plaza's breach claim, judgment on the pleadings for Cityside is proper. The wrong choices each misunderstand the scope of the pleadings. The choice saying the court must exclude Exhibit A because a Rule 12(c) motion is decided only on the face of the complaint fails because an attached exhibit is part of that face. The choice saying the court must convert to a summary-judgment motion treats the exhibit as "matters outside the pleadings," which contradicts Rule 10(c). The choice saying the court may consider Exhibit A only for notice, but not for judgment, gets halfway there — the court can go further and base a decision on it because the exhibit's text controls. Study tip: when a complaint selectively quotes a contract but attaches the full agreement, read the entire exhibit. If the attachment contradicts the complaint's allegations, the attachment governs, and a Rule 12(c) motion can win on that document alone.

Question 2

A plaintiff sued a former employee in federal court for breach of a noncompete agreement. The employee filed an answer denying the breach and asserting a limitations defense. The employee now believes that, even if every factual allegation in the complaint is accepted as true, the complaint fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted. The employee wants an early ruling and does not intend to submit affidavits or other evidence.

Which motion should the employee file?

Motion for judgment on the pleadings (correct answer)
Motion for summary judgment
Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim
Motion for a more definite statement

Explanation: This question tests the procedural vehicle for challenging the legal sufficiency of a complaint after the defendant has already answered. Whenever you see a post-answer motion, ask whether the pleadings are closed and whether the motion depends on evidence outside them. The employee has already filed an answer, so the initial window for a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim—normally made before pleading—has passed. But the same legal challenge can still be made by moving for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c). That motion is decided solely on the pleadings, accepts the complaint's factual allegations as true, and asks whether the complaint states a claim. Because the employee wants an early ruling and does not intend to submit affidavits or other evidence, this motion is the perfect fit: it requires no evidence and tests exactly the issue the employee believes in. Motion for summary judgment, by contrast, requires extraneous evidence such as affidavits or discovery materials to show no genuine factual dispute; the employee expressly disclaims evidence. A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is the right substantive standard but the wrong procedural timing: after the answer is filed, judgment on the pleadings is the proper route (although some courts may treat a mislabeled post-answer motion to dismiss under Rule iecewise(c). A motion for a more definite statement targets vagueness or ambiguity, not legal insufficiency, and it must be made before answering, so it is unavailable here too. Study takeaway: After the pleadings are closed yet before trial, if a party wants to attack the complaint's legal sufficiency without evidence, reach for judgment on the pleadings—not summary judgment and not a Rule iecewise(b)(6) motion.

Question 3

A seller sued a buyer for the price of goods. The buyer's answer denied that the goods conformed to the contract and denied that the seller had been paid. The seller moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that the complaint stated a strong claim and that the buyer's denials were conclusory and unsupported. Neither party submitted affidavits or other evidence.

Which issue raised by the seller's motion is most important for the court to resolve?

Whether the complaint's well-pleaded allegations must be accepted as true on such a motion.
Whether a motion for judgment on the pleadings may be filed before discovery has been completed.
Whether the buyer's denials create factual disputes that prevent judgment on the pleadings. (correct answer)
Whether the buyer's denials must be supported by admissible evidence in order to defeat the motion.

Explanation: When you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings, remember that the court may look only at the complaint and answer — no affidavits or evidence. The central question is whether the pleadings themselves reveal a material factual dispute. Under that standard, the buyer's answer denied the goods conformed and denied that the seller had been paid; those are factual denials of essential allegations. If the buyer's denials are sufficient to put those facts in issue, then the seller cannot win on the pleadings alone. That is why the most important issue is whether the buyer's denials create factual disputes — if they do, the motion must be denied regardless of how strong the complaint appears. The suggestion that well-pleaded allegations must be accepted as true is not the lawyer's key issue; yes, courts accept the complaint's factual allegations as true on such a motion, but that rule does not resolve whether the answer's denials defeat the complaint. Similarly, whether a motion for judgment on the pleadings may be filed before discovery is a procedural hoop, not determinative here — such motions are generally allowed after pleadings close, discovery timing does not control outcome. And the argument that denials must be supported by admissible evidence misunderstands the procedural posture: at the pleadings stage, no evidence is required; a denial need only fairly controvert the allegation, and the buyer may later prove its case at trial. So the court must focus on whether the answer's denials genuinely dispute material facts. On this exam, watch for the trap of importing summary judgment evidence rules into judgment on the pleadings. The remedy is simple: compare complaint and answer, and if a material fact is denied, deny the motion.

Question 4

A defendant filed an answer in a federal contract action. Discovery proceeded, a trial date was set, and thirty days before trial the defendant moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing for the first time that the complaint failed to state a claim. The motion did not rely on any evidence outside the pleadings. The plaintiff opposes the motion.

Which additional fact would be most important in deciding whether the court should consider the defendant's motion?

The defendant did not file the motion immediately after its answer was filed.
Hearing the motion would require postponing the scheduled trial. (correct answer)
The plaintiff has completed discovery and prepared trial exhibits.
The defendant's motion is based only on the face of the complaint.

Explanation: Whenever you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings, think Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c): the motion is proper after the pleadings close, but only if it is made "early enough not to delay trial." The key timing question is not how soon the motion came after the answer, but whether it disrupts the trial date. Here, the most important additional fact is that hearing the motion would require postponing the scheduled trial. A court has discretion to deny a late 12(c) motion that would derail an imminent trial, even if the motion is legally valid on the merits. The fact that the defendant did not file the motion immediately after its answer is not controlling; Rule 12(c) has no immediate-filing requirement. It only requires the motion after the pleadings are closed and still timely enough to avoid trial delay. Similarly, the plaintiff having completed discovery and prepared trial exhibits may suggest prejudice, but the rule's explicit focus is delay of trial, not wasted preparation. If the motion could be heard without postponement, the court could still consider it. Finally, the motion being based only on the face of the complaint is already true in the question and actually supports the defendant—it makes the 12(c) standard resemble a 12(b)(6) dismissal review—so it would weigh in favor of consideration, not against it. Study tip: when you see a Rule 12(c) question, scan the answer choices for anything about postponing trial. That phrase is the Rule's built-in safety valve, and the exam loves testing it.

Question 5

NuTech sued Vertex for breach of contract and conversion. Vertex answered and then moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing only that the conversion claim failed because the funds were converted during a business transaction covered by the contract's integration clause. The district court concluded that Vertex was entitled to judgment on the conversion claim but that the contract claim should proceed to trial.

Rule 12(c) provides: "After the pleadings are closed—but early enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings." Rule 54(b) provides: "When an action presents more than one claim for relief, the court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more, but fewer than all, claims or parties only if the court expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay. Otherwise, any order or other decision that adjudicates fewer than all the claims does not end the action as to any of the claims and may be revised at any time before the entry of a judgment adjudicating all the claims."

If the district court enters judgment for Vertex on only the conversion claim, how is that ruling properly characterized?

It is immediately appealable as a final judgment because Vertex's conversion claim has been fully adjudicated on the merits.
It is an interlocutory order unless the court expressly determines under Rule 54(b) that there is no just reason for delay, in which case it becomes appealable. (correct answer)
It is an immediately appealable final judgment only if Vertex files a notice of appeal within 30 days, because Rule 54(b) automatically applies to all partial Rule 12(c) rulings.
It is an advisory ruling that may be revised at any time, but the court may not enter it before the entire action has been resolved.

Explanation: Whenever you see a ruling that disposes of only one claim in a multi-claim lawsuit, the issue is whether it is truly "final" and appealable. A final judgment ordinarily ends the entire action, but Rule 54(b) creates a narrow exception for multiple claims: the court may direct entry of final judgment as to one claim only if it expressly determines there is no just reason for delay. Here, Vertex won judgment on the pleadings on theft conversion claim, but NuTech's contract claim remains pending. Therefore, rulin is not immediately appealable just because one claim was fully adjudicated. Instead, it is an interlocutory order—subject to revision at any time—unless the district court makes the express Rule 54(b) certification, in which case theft conversion judgment becomes final and appealable immediately. The first wrong choice treats adjudication of one claim on theft merits as enough for finality, ignoring pending contract claim. The third wrong choice confuses appellate timing with certification: filing a notice of appeal within 30 days does not make an interlocutory order final, and Rule 54(b) does not automatically apply to Rule 12(c) rulings. The fourth wrong choice correctly notes theft ruling may be revised, but incorrectly says theft court "may not enter it" before theft entire action ends—Rule 54(b) expressly permits entry of judgment on fewer than all claims, provided certification is made. Whenever you see partial adjudication, ask: Did theft court make an express "no just reason for delay" finding? If yes, it becomes appealable; if no, it remains interlocutory and revisable.

Question 6

A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court. Before filing an answer, the defendant moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim. While that motion was pending, the plaintiff moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that the defendant's failure to file an answer means the complaint's factual allegations must be accepted as true.

How should the court treat the plaintiff's motion?

Grant it, because the defendant failed to file an answer and therefore admitted the complaint's allegations.
Deny it, because a motion for judgment on the pleadings may be filed only after a motion to dismiss is resolved.
Treat it as a motion for summary judgment because the defendant's dismissal motion is outside the pleadings.
Deny it as premature, because a motion to dismiss is not a pleading and the pleadings are not closed. (correct answer)

Explanation: When you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the first question to ask is whether the pleadings are actually closed. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a), "pleadings" are the complaint, the answer, and certain replies—not motions. A defendant's motion to dismiss is not a pleading. Here, the defendant filed that motion before filing an answer, and FRCP 12(a)(4) postpones the answer deadline until the motion to dismiss is resolved. So at this point the answer has not been filed and is not yet due; therefore the complaint and answer have not both been submitted, and the pleadings are not closed. The plaintiff's Rule 12(c) motion is premature, so the court should deny it. Why not the other outcomes? First, granting the motion "because the defendant failed to file an answer and therefore admitted the complaint's allegations" is wrong: the defendant's answer deadline is suspended while the motion to dismiss is pending, so failure to answer is not an admission. Second, denying it because a Rule 12(c){ motion "may be filed only after a motion to dismiss is resolved" states the timing rule too broadly: the real key is closed pleadings, not merely resolution of a prior motion to dismiss. Third, treating the motion as one for summary judgment "because the defendant's dismissal motion is outside the pleadings" is also wrong: a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is decided on the pleadings themselves; outside-pleading materials can trigger summary-judgment treatment under Rule 12(d), but that principle does not apply here simply because a dismissal motion is pending. Study tip: for judgment on the pleadings, always check whether both complaint and answer are on file. Misdirection on this exam often involves treating motions as pleadings or treating a delayed answer as a default.

Question 7

A bank sued a guarantor in federal court on a written guaranty. The guarantor's answer admitted the guaranty, the borrower's default, and the amount due, but asserted as an affirmative defense that the bank had orally released the guarantor from liability. The bank moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that the answer admitted every element of the claim and that the alleged oral release was not a legally sufficient defense. The guarantor filed no evidence, relying on the release allegation in the answer.

Which of the following is the most significant issue the court must decide?

Whether the bank's motion must be converted to a summary judgment motion because the guarantor relied on facts outside the complaint.
Whether the guarantor's release defense, if accepted as true, is legally sufficient to defeat the bank's claim. (correct answer)
Whether a plaintiff may move for judgment on the pleadings after a defendant has filed an answer.
Whether the guarantor's failure to submit evidence supporting the release admits the bank's claim.

Explanation: When you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings, remember the standard: the court accepts all well-pleaded facts in the nonmoving party's favor and asks whether the moving party is clearly entitled to judgment as a matter of law. It is a legal-sufficiency test, not a factual contest. Here, the bank claims the answer admitted every element of its claim and that the alleged oral release cannot defeat the guaranty. But the guarantor's answer affirmatively alleges an oral release, and the court must accept that factual allegation as true at this stage. So the most significant issue is whether that release defense, accepted as true, is legally sufficient to overcome the bank's claim. That is what the court must decide. The suggestion that the motion must be converted to summary judgment because the guarantor relied on facts outside the complaint is wrong: the release was pleaded in the answer, so it is part of the pleadings. The question whether a plaintiff may move after an answer is also not a live issue—Rule 12(c) expressly allows judgment on the pleadings after the pleadings close. And the guarantor's failure to file evidence does not admit the claim; on this motion, no evidence is required because the court tests the legal adequacy of the allegations, not their proof. A good takeaway: distinguish judgment on the pleadings from summary judgment. One decides law on the pleadings; the other decides facts on evidence. If a pleaded defense is legally viable, the motion should be denied.

Question 8

Lenox sued Dr. Hale for medical malpractice. The complaint alleged: "Dr. Hale negligently treated plaintiff during surgery on January 10, causing plaintiff to suffer severe and permanent injuries." It alleged no additional facts about what Dr. Hale did or failed to do. Dr. Hale answered with a general denial and moved for judgment on the pleadings.

The court in Reyes v. Midland Health held: "A motion for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) is reviewed under the same standard as a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). The court must accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true, but need not accept legal conclusions or formulaic recitations of elements. A complaint that merely states a defendant committed negligence, without pleading facts tending to show how the duty was breached, does not state a claim for relief."

Under Reyes, how should the court rule on Dr. Hale's motion?

Deny it, because the court must accept all allegations in the complaint as true and view them in the light most favorable to Lenox.
Deny it, because Dr. Hale's general denial creates a factual dispute that can be resolved only at trial.
Grant it, because Dr. Hale's general denial is a verified pleading that conclusively refutes the complaint's assertion of negligence.
Grant it, because the complaint merely tracks the elements of negligence and pleads no facts supporting a plausible breach by Dr. Hale. (correct answer)

Explanation: Whenever you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c), your first instinct should be: this is really a Rule 12(b)(6 sufficiency test, so the question is whether the complaint states a plausible claim—not whether evidence exists. Under Reyes, well-pleaded factual allegations are accepted as true, but formulaic legal conclusions are not. Lenox alleged only that Dr. Hale "negligently treated" him during surgery, causing injury. That language merely tracks the negligence elements—"duty, breach, causation"—without alleging any specific act or omission that breached the duty. There are no facts about what Dr. Hale did or failed to do during the surgery. So the complaint is conclusory, not plausible, and the court should grant Dr. Hale's motion. That denial is a pleading, not evidence, and it cannot create a factual dispute for purposes of a Rule 12(c motion. The motion tests whether the complaint's allegations are legally sufficient, not whether the parties disagree about them. Similarly, the answer being allegedly "verified" does not help: a verified denial is still just a denial; it does not conclusively refuteanything, and it certainly does not cure the complaint's failure to plead factual content. Remember this pattern: on the bar exam, when you see 12(c or 12(b)(6, separate factual allegations from legal conclusions—formulaic recitations of elements will not survive.

Question 9

Bly Supply Co. sued Nordic Manufacturing for breach of contract. Nordic answered, denying liability and asserting the statute of frauds as an affirmative defense. After the pleadings closed, Nordic filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings. In support, Nordic attached an affidavit from its vice president stating that no contract exceeding $500 was ever signed. Bly opposed, arguing that the affidavit is outside the pleadings and must be ignored.

Rule ͏ 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides: "After the pleadings are closed—but early enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings." Rule ͏ 12(d) provides: "If, on a motion under Rule ͏ 12(b)(6) or 12(c), matters outside the pleadings are presented to the court and not excluded by it, the court must treat the motion as one for summary judgment and must give all parties a reasonable opportunity to present all material that is pertinent to the motion."

If the court is unwilling to exclude Nordic's affidavit, what is the proper course?

The court may disregard the affidavit because a Rule ͏ 12(c) motion is limited to the pleadings, and it may grant the motion if the complaint fails on its face.
The court must treat the motion as one for summary judgment, afford Bly a reasonable opportunity to present its own evidence, and only then decide whether Nordic is entitled to judgment. (correct answer)
The court must strike the affidavit as procedurally improper, deny the motion, because evidence outside the pleadings may not be considered on a Rule ͏ 12(c) motion.
The court must convert the motion to a motion for summary judgment and immediately enter judgment for Nordic unless Bly offers evidence demonstrating a factual dispute at the hearing.

Explanation: When you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings, remember the critical trap: Rule ͏ 12(c) is decided only on pleadings, but Rule ͏ 12(d) immediately changes the game if either side submits matters outside the pleadings—unless the court excludes them. Here, Nordic submitted an affidavit, and Bly explicitly argues it must be ignored. Since the court is unwilling to exclude it, the proper path is conversion. The court must treat Nordic's motion as one for summary judgment, give Bly a reasonable opportunity to present its own evidence, and then decide whether Nordic is entitled to judgment under the summary judgment standard. That is what the correct choice describes: conversion, fair opportunity, then decision. The choice saying the court may disregard the affidavit because Rule ͏ 12(c) is limited to pleadings ignores Rule ͏ 12(d): once outside matters are presented and not excluded, they cannot simply be ignored. The court does have discretion to exclude—but here it is unwilling to do so.
The choice insisting the court must strike the affidavit as procedurally improper and deny the motion is also wrong because providing an affidavit in support of a judgment-on-the-pleadings motion does not make it automatically improper—it is the trigger for conversion.
The final choice has the right conversion idea but wrongly says the court should immediately enter judgment unless Bly offers evidence at the hearing. Rule ͏ 12(d) explicitly requires a reasonable opportunity to present all material pertinent to the motion—Bly cannot be forced to respond on the spot, and the court cannot leap to judgment before that opportunity is real.
Takeaway: whenever you see an affidavit, declaration, or other outside evidence attached to a Rule ͏ 12(b)(6) or 12(c) motion, ask only one question—will the court exclude it? If not, it must convert the motion to summary judgment and provide full opportunity to respond.

Question 10

Toro sued Oka for breach of contract. Oka answered and asserted a counterclaim designated as a counterclaim. Oka moved for judgment on the pleadings on its counterclaim 10 days after serving its answer, when Toro had not yet served any answer or other response to the counterclaim. The applicable 21-day response period had not yet run.

Rule 7(a)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that an answer to a counterclaim designated as a counterclaim is an allowed pleading. Rule 12(a)(1)(B) provides that a party must serve an answer to a counterclaim within 21 days after being served with the pleading that states the counterclaim. Rule 12(c) provides: "After the pleadings are closed—but early enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings."

Under the rules, may Oka properly move for judgment on the pleadings before Toro's response to the counterclaim is due?

Yes, because Toro's failure to serve a timely answer admits the allegations in the counterclaim and leaves no factual issue for trial.
Yes, because Rule 12(c) authorizes judgment on the pleadings without regard to whether an answer to a counterclaim has been filed or the time to answer has run.
No, because Oka must first obtain a clerk's entry of default before seeking judgment on the pleadings.
No, because Oka may move only after the pleadings are closed, and Toro still has time to serve an answer to the counterclaim. (correct answer)

Explanation: When you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c), the critical question is always: are the pleadings closed? Here, Oka served an answer with a counterclaim, but Toro still had 21 days to serve an answer to that counterclaim. Because that response period had not expired, the pleadings were not yet closed. Rule 12(c) explicitly permits a motion only "[a]fter the pleadings are closed," so Oka's motion is premature. That is why the correct answer is that Oka may not move yet. The other choices each miss the timing rule. The choice saying Toro's failure to serve a timely answer admits the allegations fails because Toro's answer was not yet due; no default or admission has occurred. The choice claiming Rule 12(c) authorizes judgment without regard to whether an answer has been filed or the time to answer has run directly contradicts the rule's "after the pleadings are closed" requirement. The choice requiring a clerk's entry of default before moving mistakes default judgment for judgment on the pleadings; default is not a prerequisite, and a default could not be entered before the response deadline anyway. Study tip: whenever you see Rule 12(c), checklist two things—have all pleadings been served, and has every response deadline expired? If any response is still due, the pleadings are still open, and the motion must wait.

Question 11

An insured sued an insurer in federal court. The insurer's answer admitted that a policy existed but denied that the claimed loss was covered. The insured moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that the answer's admissions and the complaint's allegations entitled it to judgment as a matter of law. In support, the insured submitted an adjuster's report describing the loss and stating that the loss fell within the policy's coverage terms. The insurer objected that the report was outside the pleadings.

Which issue is most important in deciding how the court should handle the insured's motion?

Whether the insured, as the party that filed the complaint, may move for judgment on the pleadings after the answer is filed.
Whether the insurer's denial of coverage, rather than the adjuster's report, is the fact that creates a genuine issue for trial.
Whether the adjuster's report is outside the pleadings and, if not excluded, requires the motion to be treated as one for summary judgment. (correct answer)
Whether the insurer's objection to the report is enough to make the court exclude it from consideration.

Explanation: When you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings, recall Rule 12(c): the court may consider only the pleadings—the complaint, answer, and attachments incorporated by reference. If either party submits evidence outside the pleadings, such as the adjuster's report, the court must either exclude that evidence or convert the motion into one for summary judgment and give the parties a reasonable opportunity to respond. That is the central issue here: the insured's report describes the loss and coverage, but it is not part of the pleadings, so its treatment determines how the motion proceeds. The other choices miss that point. A litigant who filed the complaint may indeed move for judgment on the pleadings after the answer is filed, so that is not the problem. The insurer's denial of coverage does not automatically create a genuine issue of fact; denials are only significant if supported by evidence, whereas the adjuster's report is what supplies potential factual support. And the insurer's mere objection does not control the outcome—the judge must decide whether to exclude the report or convert the motion; the objection alone is not enough to force exclusion. Your study takeaway: on civil procedure questions, whenever "outside the pleadings" appears, think conversion to summary judgment. That phrase is a trigger you should instantly associate with Rule 12(d).

Question 12

Apex Finance sued Beacon Builders for breach of a loan agreement. The complaint alleged: (1) Apex and Beacon executed a valid loan agreement; (2) Apex loaned $250,000 to Beacon; (3) Apex demanded payment; and (4) Beacon failed to repay the loan when due. Beacon's answer admitted paragraphs 1 and 2, denied paragraph 3, and said nothing about paragraph 4.

Rule 8(b)(6) provides: "A party must admit or deny the allegations asserted against it by an opposing party. A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the allegation. A party that lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of an allegation must so state, and this has the effect of a denial. Any allegation not denied is admitted." Rule 12(c) provides: "After the pleadings are closed—but early enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings."

How should the court rule on Apex's motion for judgment on the pleadings?

Deny the motion, because discovery has not yet occurred and Apex has not had an opportunity to prove the facts underlying its complaint.
Deny the motion, because an unanswered allegation cannot be treated as an admission on a Rule 12(c) motion; only an express denial in the answer counts.
Grant the motion, because allegations not denied are admitted and, with the admitted contract and failure to repay, no material factual dispute remains. (correct answer)
Grant the motion only if the court first treats it as one for summary judgment, because Beacon's omission raises a matter outside the pleadings.

Explanation: Whenever you see a motion for judgment on the pleadings, remember that the court looks only at the pleadings and treats well-pleaded factual allegations as true—but here the key is Rule 8(b)(6): any allegation not denied is admitted. Beacon expressly denied only the demand paragraph, and it said nothing about the failure to repay. Because an unanswered allegation is treated as an admission, paragraph 4 is admitted. Combined with the admitted loan agreement, the admitted loan of $250,000, and the admitted failure to repay when due, every element of Apex's breach claim is established. No material factual dispute remains, so the motion should be granted. The first wrong choice suggests discovery is needed to prove the facts. That misses the point: Beacon's admissions already established the facts, so Apex does not need discovery. The second wrong choice claims an unanswered allegation cannot be treated as an admission. That directly contradicts Rule 8(b)(6), so it is a trap—silence is not a denial; it is a concession. The third wrong choice, about converting to summary judgment, is also incorrect because the court is relying only on the pleadings and the admissions within them, not on outside evidence. Your study tip: on questions about pleading rules, track each paragraph of the complaint against the answer. Express denials, insufficient-knowledge denials, and silence all have different effects—and silence admits.