I’m not a fan of sanctions motions. They’re unpleasant, usually directed specifically at opposing counsel, and often are subject to abuse or misuse. Of course, sometimes they are appropriate and necessary. Still, the standard for filing one should be “clear and convincing,” at minimum — if you harbor any doubt at all about the action in question, let it go and address the issue on the merits.
Our friend Alan Kluger just had a Rule 11 motion denied by Judge Cohn involving, of all things, foot pads.
(Once again, that’s a sentence I never thought I’d write!)
I like Judge Cohn’s order, which you can read courtesy of Scribd here, for its simplicity and directness.
Alan undoubtedly knows what he is doing, but you have to wonder about continuing to pursue a Rule 11 motion regarding the reasonableness of the plaintiff’s complaint after the Court has already denied a motion to dismiss as to a number of the plaintiff’s claims.
How does that advance the litigation?
Indeed, is it possible the defendant has lost something more here than just this particular motion?