This article will argue that the standard for imposing sanctions under Rule 11 should focus on the nature of the conduct alleged to violate the rule. Sanctions under the rule can be triggered by different types of conduct. Certain types of conduct should be scrutinized more closely, requiring the imposition of sanctions more frequently. Factors such as whether a party subject to Rule 11 sanctions is acting pro se or through counsel should also impact on a decision to assess sanctions under Rule 11. Each type of conduct should be evaluated under an independent set of standards. Part I will discuss the 1983 amendments to Rule 11 and how they have changed the rule. Part II divides the Rule into five categories with each category representing a...
Admittedly, amended Rule 11 has stirred up a great deal of controversy. The Advisory Committee of wh...
Congress reformed the procedures for amending the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1988 by prescr...
Prompted by their perception that significant civil litigation misconduct involving frivolous papers...
The purpose of this article is to explore the substantive provisions of amended Rule 11 and its hist...
This article examines the Townsend decision and its interpretation and application of Rule 11 sancti...
With only a small risk of overstatement, one could say that sanctions in civil litigation exploded d...
The House of Representatives has passed H.R. 720, a bill that would amend Rule 11 of the Federal Rul...
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires courts to sanction attorneys who file frivolous papers. ...
The 1983 amendments to Federal Civil Procedure Rule 11, concerning sanctions for frivolous litigatio...
The aim of this article is to analyze some of the complex issues involved in attempting to apply the...
The 1983 revision of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ( Rule 11 or the Rule ) prove...
This Comment addresses the application of Rule 11 sanctions to pro se litigants and argues that base...
Prior to the 1983 amendments to Rule 11, there was some concern as to whether or not the Federal Rul...
Since its amendment in 1983, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure has become the focus of...
This 1981 Federal Judicial Center paper surveys the current state of the law with respect to sanctio...
Admittedly, amended Rule 11 has stirred up a great deal of controversy. The Advisory Committee of wh...
Congress reformed the procedures for amending the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1988 by prescr...
Prompted by their perception that significant civil litigation misconduct involving frivolous papers...
The purpose of this article is to explore the substantive provisions of amended Rule 11 and its hist...
This article examines the Townsend decision and its interpretation and application of Rule 11 sancti...
With only a small risk of overstatement, one could say that sanctions in civil litigation exploded d...
The House of Representatives has passed H.R. 720, a bill that would amend Rule 11 of the Federal Rul...
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires courts to sanction attorneys who file frivolous papers. ...
The 1983 amendments to Federal Civil Procedure Rule 11, concerning sanctions for frivolous litigatio...
The aim of this article is to analyze some of the complex issues involved in attempting to apply the...
The 1983 revision of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ( Rule 11 or the Rule ) prove...
This Comment addresses the application of Rule 11 sanctions to pro se litigants and argues that base...
Prior to the 1983 amendments to Rule 11, there was some concern as to whether or not the Federal Rul...
Since its amendment in 1983, Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure has become the focus of...
This 1981 Federal Judicial Center paper surveys the current state of the law with respect to sanctio...
Admittedly, amended Rule 11 has stirred up a great deal of controversy. The Advisory Committee of wh...
Congress reformed the procedures for amending the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1988 by prescr...
Prompted by their perception that significant civil litigation misconduct involving frivolous papers...