Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Tandem Computers Inc.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON (1) DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, EXPENSES AND COSTS (# 127) AND (2) IMPOSITION OF RULE 11 SANCTIONS UPON THE DEFENDANT’S COUNSEL SUA SPONTE PURSUANT TO RULE 11(c)(1)(B), FED.R.CTVP.
COLLINGS, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant Tandem Computers Incorporated (hereinafter “Tandem”) has filed a post-trial motion pursuant to Rule 11, Fed.R.Civ. P., and 28 U.S.C. § 1927, requesting that sanctions be imposed upon, and excess costs be assessed against, the plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter “EEOC”). Tandem contends…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Juan E. Cruz v. Robert Savage, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
- Media Duplication Services, Ltd. v. Hdg Software, Inc., Joseph WineCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- Charles Muthig and Rhoda Muthig v. Brant Point Nantucket, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- Cruz v. SavageDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1988
3Cited by8 opinions
- Argentieri v. Fisher Landscapes, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1998
- Murphy v. CuomoDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1996
- Obert v. Republic Western InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 2003
- Ultra-Temp Corp. v. Advanced Vacuum Systems, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2000
- Barth v. KayeDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.