Simon Debartolo Group, L.P., Gordon Altman Butowsky Weitzen Shalov & Wein v. The Richard E. Jacobs Group, Inc., and New England Development, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that courts ordinarily “are under no particular obligation to make findings with regard to the compliance of litigants and their counsel with Rule 11 or to impose sanctions once a violation is found”
• noting that Rule 11 intended to preclude \emptyhead pureheart\ justification for patently frivolous suits
• noting that the PSLRA “functions . . . to reduce courts’ discretion in choosing whether to conduct the Rule 11 inquiry at all”
• explaining that Rule 11 frivolous ness requires that it be “clear under existing precedents that there is no chance of success and no reasonable argument to extend, modify or reverse the law as it stands.”
• affirming Rule 11(b)(2) sanction where no authority supported plaintiff’s theory of liability under SEC Rule 10b-13
• noting the PSLRA circumscribes a district court’s discretion “in choosing whether to conduct the Rule 11 inquiry at all and whether and how to sanction a party once a violation is found”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).