Legal Opinion
Lightning Lube, Inc. v. Witco Corp.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided December 17, 1992No. Civ. A. No. 87-3242 (WGB)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BASSLER, District Judge:
This matter comes before the Court on the renewed motion of plaintiff and counterclaim defendant, Lightning Lube, Inc., t/a Laser Lube (“Lube”), and third-party defendant Ralph Yenuto (collectively, the “Movants”). The Movants seek sanctions under Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 11 and attorneys’ fees in the amount of $1,393,267.00 under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 against defendant and *665counterclaimant Witco Corporation (“Wit-co”) and its counsel, Carella, Byrne, Bain, Gilfillan, Cecchi & Stewart (“Carella, Byrne”). For the following reasons, the motion is denied.
Background
This action…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Business Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Communications Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Dover Steel Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
- Kramer v. TribeDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1994
- In Re KilgoreUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · 2000
- In Re Prudential Insurance Co. of America Sales Practices LitigationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1999
- Cone Corp. v. Hillsborough CountyDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 1994
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.