In Re Itel Securities Litigation. I. Walton Bader, and Bader and Bader v. Itel Corporation, and Class

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that court retains jurisdiction to sanction counsel after he withdraws from action
• rejecting an argument that a court’s power to impose sanctions for frivolous litigation is limited by the First Amendment
• rejecting an argument that a court’s power to impose sanctions for frivolous litigation is limited by the First Amendment
• noting sanctions are justified when a party acts for an improper purpose—even if the act consists of making a truthful statement or a non-frivolous argument
• rejecting First Amendment argument, stating that “[t]he power of the federal courts to sanction attorney misconduct, be it frivolous litigation or contemptuous behavior, is beyond doubt”
• “Sanctions may also be awarded sua sponte under the court’s inherent power.” (citing Roadway Exp., 447 U.S. at 765, 100 S. Ct. 2455)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).