Legal Opinion

Schmude v. Sheahan

District Court, N.D. Illinois

Decided March 29, 2004No. 00 C 4580PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

NORGLE, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

In an order dated October 2, 2003, the court advised and gave notice to attorneys Edward R. Theobald, Alan R. Brunell, and Anthony Pinelli (collectively “counsel”) that the court intended to proceed on a Rule to Show Cause as to why sanctions should not issue, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and the court’s inherent powers. In that order the court stated that a Rule to Show Cause would be issued expeditiously. On October 8, 2003, the court issued the Rule to Show Cause (“Rule”), and allowed counsel 45 days to respond in writing.…

2Cases cited98 opinions

  1. Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Liteky v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Quackenbush v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, Local No. 70Supreme Court of the United States · 1974

93 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. World Water Works Holdings, Inc. v. Cont'l Cas. Co.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 2019
  2. Andrew Corp. v. Beverly Manufacturing Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2006
  3. Bergeron v. Capital OneDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2025
  4. Hess v. Biomet, Inc.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 2022
  5. Osundairo v. GlandianDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2020

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API