Legal Opinion
Cobell v. Norton
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 12, 2002No. Civ.A. No. 96-1285(RCL)PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
LAMBERTH, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on defendants’ motion for sanctions under Rule 11 [1397], which alleged that plaintiffs’ attorney Dennis Gingold submitted a false or misleading affidavit in support of a fee application submitted by plaintiffs. Instead of filing an opposition brief, plaintiffs moved for a stay of the Rule 11 motion [1413] until this Court had ruled on their fee application. Having issued this date an opinion and order on the fee application, the Court now turns to defendants’ Rule 11 motion. Upon consideration of defendants’…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Scott J. Rafferty, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Nynex Corporation, Appellees/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
- Cobell v. NortonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2001
- Long v. United States Department of JusticeDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2002
3Cited by19 opinions
- Smith v. ScaliaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Naegele v. AlbersDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2005
- Beg Investments, LLC v. AlbertiDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Jordan v. United States Department of LaborDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Stankevich v. KaplanDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.