Legal Opinion
Appeal of Licht & Semonoff
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided July 3, 1986No. 85-1996PublishedCited by 60 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BOWNES, Circuit Judge.
The law firm of Licht & Semonoff (the firm) appeals from an order of the district court imposing monetary sanctions against it pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(g) for abuse of discovery. Rule 26(g) states in pertinent part:(g) Signing of Discovery Requests, Responses, and Objections. Every request for discovery- ■ or response or objection thereto made by a party represented by an attorney shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in his individual name, whose address shall be stated. ... The signature of the attorney or party constitutes a…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Catlin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. RisjordSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Cobbledick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- In Re Recticel Foam Corporation, in Re San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Litigation. Appeal of Recticel Foam CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- Chaves v. M/V Medina StarCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Kouri PerezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1999
- G.J.B. & Associates, Inc. v. SingletonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
- Williams v. United States (In Re Williams)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.