This one, by Judge Posner, speaks for itself.
“The complaint is a hideous sprawling mess, 40 pages in length with 221 paragraphs of allegations. We have found it difficult and in many instances impossible to ascertain the nature of the charges. It would have been better had the defendants deferred their motion, and the district judge his ruling, until either the defendants served contention interrogatories designed to smoke out what exactly the plaintiffs are charging, or better, because quicker and cheaper, the judge told the plaintiffs to specify the acts of the defendants that they are complaining about so that he could decide how much of the complaint was preempted. Still, the defendants can hardly be blamed for wanting to strangle the monster in its crib. . . .
The first 19 pages of the 40-page complaint accuse Ocwen of a variety of skullduggery, but do not indicate which bad acts are being charged as a violation of federal law and which as a violation of state law.” In re Ocwen Servicing, LLC, Mortgage Servicing Litigation, No. 06-3132 (7th Cir. June 22, 2007).

Skullduggery is deception or trickery. Although the origin is apparently Scottish, it sounds pure pirate to me.