Egelhof Ex Rel. Red Hat, Inc. v. Szulik
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCalabria, Judge
I concur with the majority that the plaintiff and plaintiffs counsel were given appropriate notice of the basis for the sanctions that were brought against them and had an opportunity to be heard. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding that the defendants must specifically allege that plaintiff filed claims “for an improper purpose.” The trial court correctly imposed non-monetary sanctions under both Rule 11 and their inherent power to discipline attorneys who appear before the court. Furthermore, I agree with the defendants that the trial court erred by failing to award…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bryson v. SullivanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
- Sunamerica Financial Corp. v. BonhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
- Couch v. Private Diagnostic ClinicCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- North Carolina State Bar v. RandolphSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
- In Re Contempt Proceeding of SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.