Gregory Haynes v. City of San Francisco

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming that 12 a court has “substantial leeway” when deciding whether to impose § 1927 sanctions
• “The purpose of § 1927 may be to deter attorney misconduct, or to compensate victims of an attorney’s malfeasance, or to both compensate and deter.”
• “The 27 1 Plaintiff’s knowledge is further demonstrated by the fact that his Response to the 28 Motion to Dismiss did not dispute that PPD is a non-jural entity. (Doc. 53 at 8
• the purpose of § 1927 is to compensate victims of attorney’s malfeasance
• awards under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 are 2 discretionary such that the court may permissibly take ability 3 to pay into account, although courts are not required to limit 4 an award to the amount that the sanctioned attorney is able to 5 pay

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).