Skip to main content
Second Circuit· 10/15/1986

Oliveri v. Thompson

Citations

  • 803 F.2d 1265
  • 5 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 761
  • 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 32446

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that at the time of filing suits in police misconduct cases, plaintiff is not \likely to know much about the relevant internal operations of the police department\
  • stating that “[c]ourts should be sensitive to the impact of sanctions on attorneys. They can be economically punishing, as well as professionally harmful”
  • noting that at the time of filing suits in police misconduct cases, plaintiff is not \likely to know much about the relevant internal operations of the police department\
  • explaining that there is no “meaningful difference” between the standards for imposing sanctions under section 1927 and a court’s inherent authority
  • approving the district court's reducing sanction against attorney from $51,000 to $5,000 because of his financial condition
  • “Limiting the application of rule 11 to testing the attorney’s conduct at the time a paper is signed is virtually mandated by the plain language of the rule.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pratt

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

290 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Oliveri v. Thompson

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.