Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Black v. Ameritel Inns, Inc.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided November 25, 2003No. 29580Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Eismann

I do not believe that Rule 11(a)(1) of the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes the striking of the complaint in this ease. The purpose of that rule is to insure that a document filed in a case is signed either by an attorney licensed to practice law in Idaho, or by the litigant if he or she is not represented by an attorney licensed to practice in Idaho, so that an appropriate sanction can be imposed if the document was signed in violation of the rule.

Rule 11 requires that the pleading be (1) well grounded in fact, (2) warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re Contempt Proceedings of BrainardIdaho Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Koehn v. RigginsIdaho Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Matter of DepewIdaho Supreme Court · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API