Legal Opinion

First Bank of Marietta, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided October 10, 2002No. 00-4541, 00-4542PublishedCited by 221 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HAYNES, District Judge.

Plaintiff First Bank of Marietta (“First Bank”) appeals the district court’s award of attorney fees and sanctions under its inherent powers and the district court’s denial of First Bank’s motion for sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company (“Hartford”) asserts a cross appeal of the district court’s ruling that attorney fees and expenses are not available under Rule 11 for Hartford’s failure to comply with the Rule ll’s safe harbor provisions, and that attorney fees can not be awarded…

2Cases cited54 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
  5. Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by221 opinions

  1. Baron T. Youn Kyong Hwan Choi, D/B/A Ckh Sportsworld, Ltd. v. Track, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
  2. Marla Montell v. Diversified Clinical ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2014
  3. Stalley v. Methodist HealthcareCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
  4. Metz v. Unizan BankCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
  5. Scott v. Metropolitan Health Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007

216 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API