Legal Opinion
Metz v. Unizan Bank
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided August 24, 2011No. 09-3999PublishedCited by 105 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SILER, Circuit Judge.
Defendant Fifth Third Bank, N.A. (“Fifth Third”) sought sanctions against attorney Daniel G. Morris because, after Fifth Third had been dismissed with prejudice, Morris filed a complaint that reasserted claims against Fifth Third that were identical to previously dismissed claims. Morris never responded to Fifth Third’s request for sanctions, and the district court sanctioned Morris under its inherent powers. Morris now appeals. For the reasons stated below, we AFFIRM the district court’s imposition of sanctions.
I
In 2005, Plaintiffs Carol Metz and others filed a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- First Bank of Marietta, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2002
- Red Carpet Studios Division of Source Advantage, Ltd. v. SaterCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
- Big Yank Corporation v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by105 opinions
- Laukus v. Rio Brands, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2013
- United States v. AleoCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- Plastech Holding Corp. v. WM GreenTech Automotive Corp.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2017
- United States v. Gabriel Llanez-GarciaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
- United States Ex Rel. Tingley v. PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
100 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.