Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
42. Should the court grant the painter's motion for sanctions?
After the painter unsuccessfully attempted to resolve the dispute with the driver's attorney over whether the driver was required to answer the deposition questions, the painter made a motion to compel answers to the deposition questions that had gone unanswered. The court granted the motion. When the driver's attorney continued instructing his client not to answer, and his client continued to refuse to answer for several months, the painter moved for Rule 11 sanctions.
A painter sued a driver in federal court. The driver's attorney directed the driver not to answer certain deposition questions during discovery even though the questions did not call for answers that would have invaded any privilege, nor was there any court-ordered limitation on discovery. The driver's attorney did not present a motion to terminate or limit the scope of the deposition.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
When the lawyer files a pleading, the lawyer thereby certifies that to the best of the lawyer's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:
the pleading is not presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;the factual contentions have evidentiary support, or if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; ANDthe denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence, or if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.The court has the power to impose sanctions limited to what is sufficient to deter repetition of such conduct against a party who presents a paper to the court in violation of the above requirements, either on the court's own initiative or on motion of the opposing party.
FRCP 26(g) allows for the imposition of sanctions when an attorney improperly certifies a discovery request «without substantial justification.»
B is correct. FRCP 11 governs pleadings and sanctions regarding matters in violation of this specific rule. Rule 11 does not apply to disclosures and discovery requests, responses, objections, and motions. The painter is attempting to impose sanctions on the driver for not complying with discovery requests, so the driver or his attorney may not be sanctioned under Rule 11.
A is incorrect. FRCP 26(g) authorizes sanctions for improper certification of discovery requests, responses, and objections. It does not apply to failure to respond to questions during a deposition.
C is incorrect. FRCP 11 sanctions do not apply to discovery requests or motions. See instead FRCP 37. Therefore, because the painter's attorney is seeking sanctions for a discovery deposition, it would be an error for the court to grant the Rule 11 motion and enter sanctions pursuant to that rule.
D is incorrect. FRCP 37(b) sanctions parties for failure to comply with a court order. However, there is no mechanism for converting a Rule 11 motion into a Rule 37(b) motion.