Pennsylvania v. McCutchen

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “bad faith” is not required for every possible disciplinary exercise of the court’s inherent power
• noting that the bad faith requirement does not extend “to every possible disciplinary exercise of the court’s inherent power”
• explaining that the court sanctioned defense counsel for conduct violating Model Rule 3.4(f) and characterizing it as a modest sanction designed to warn counsel against future similar conduct
• finding that the Supreme Court did not intend the “bad faith” requirement to limit the application of monetary sanctions under the inherent power; the district court had inherent power to impose sanctions without explicit finding of bad faith
• characterizing Chambers and Roadway as setting a bad faith standard for attorney-fees awards, although not for all exercises of inherent power
• upholding the district court’s imposition of sanctions where it found that defense counsel attempted to dissuade a non-party witness from giving testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).