Thomas v. Treasury Management Ass'n
District Court, D. Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MESSITTE, District Judge.
I
The Court considers in this case the changes wrought by the 1993 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 with regard to sanctions. While certain principles were carried forward from prior practice, the 1993 amendments gave sanctions a new look:
1) Motions for sanctions are to be filed sparingly.
2) Counsel and/or pro se litigants are required to communicate with one another to anticipate and attempt to resolve pleadings and discovery differences before they occasion the need to consider sanctions.
3) In particular, a party who objects to a pleading,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Patterson v. McLean Credit UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- In re TCI Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Sarah M. Goostree, (84-5752), (84-5869) v. State of Tennessee, Montgomery County, Tennessee, (84-5869), Montgomery County Quarterly Court, (84-5752)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Stephen Michael Ridder v. City of Springfield, Clark CountyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
- George Hadges, William M. Kunstler v. Yonkers Racing Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Kolb v. ACRA Control, Ltd.District Court, D. Maryland · 2014
- Emmenegger v. Bull Moose Tube Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1998
- Embotelladora Agral Regiomontana S.A. De C v. v. Sharp Capital, Inc.District Court, N.D. Texas · 1997
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.