Rastelli v. New York

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that Rule 11 sanctions for factually groundless claims should only be imposed where “plaintiffs offer[] no evidence to support their allegations”
• reversing award of sanctions on the basis that they were factually groundless, when plaintiffs’ testimony was offered to support the claims
• stating Rule 11 sanctions are warranted when a party demonstrates “deliberate indifference to obvious facts” that a case lacks merit, but not when the evidence is merely weak or the case is brought as a result of “poor judgment.”
• stating Rule 11 sanctions are warranted when a party demonstrates “deliberate indifference to obvious facts” that a case lacks merit, but not when the evidence is merely weak or the case is brought as a result of “poor judgment.”
• “Although we have in the past viewed certain claims as legally groundless, we have done so only in circumstances far more egregious than those involved here.”
• “Rule 11 is intended to deter claims with no factual or legal basis at all; creative claims, coupled even with ambiguous or inconsequential facts, may merit dismissal, but not punishment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).