Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that counsel “had a blatant conflict of interest and should have withdrawn” when their client could have defended against a motion for sanctions by arguing that counsel was responsible for missteps
• “[W]hen a party has participated in the filing of a paper signed by the attorney or has signed a paper himself but did not realize that such participation or signing was wrongful” under Rule 11, “then sanctions against the party are . . . not appropriate.”
• “An attorney cannot be sanctioned [ ] for failing to withdraw a claim that later proves to be groundless, provided that the attorney[ ] . . . did not decline to withdraw it upon an express request by his or her adversary after learning that it was groundless.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).