Rule 11. Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions:
a) Signature. Every pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in
the attorney’s name — or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented. The paper must state the signer’s
address, e-mail address, and telephone number. Unless a rule or statute specifically states otherwise, a pleading
need not be verified or accompanied by an affidavit. The court must strike an unsigned paper unless the omission
is promptly corrected after being called to the attorney or party’s attention.
• Intended to keep litigants in line. Keep them honest and reasonable. Originally just a signature. Person
who signs it is certifying that something is true.
b) Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper — whether
by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it — an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the
best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the
circumstances:
• Can’t show someone violated rule 11 by just showing something untrue, just a reasonable belief that
these things are true. Extends beyond the signer, continuing duty.
1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase
the cost of litigation;
- almost never found to have been violated unless one of (2)-(4) is as well
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a non-frivolous argument for
extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;
- has more bite—must have non-frivolous arguments in its favor;
(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support
after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery;
- most rule 11 sanctions,
- evidentiary support doesn’t have to be admissible at trial, or enough to convince a jury.
- Doesn’t have to win the case, but it’s got to be something that makes it justifiable to get to discovery period—
burdening the defendant;
(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based
on belief or a lack of information.
- same things go for defendant, denials are subject to rule 11, true that you don’t know, or have evidentiary
support for denial.
Murphy v. Cuomo (N.D.N.Y. 1996)
(Background):
• Suing for damages for being sprayed with pepper spray, violate const. rights.
• Suing gov’t agents but also Zarc.
• Zarc moves for summary judgment, gets that (no reasonable jury could find P entitled to relief) and seeks Rule
11 sanctions.
• Rule 11(b)(3) was violated, no reasonable belief of evidentiary support
o Could not rely on provision in (b)(3) that speaks of the allegations being “likely [to] have evidentiary
support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery” for two reasons
Allegation was not “specifically so identified”
unreasonable to think that they could get evidence
• for it be reasonable there must be evidence that you will get evidence
o think of it like “proto-evidence”.
• Very generous to plaintiffs but there has to be something there to give you reasonable belief that there would
be something there.
• MSG believes that Sierocinski had this. Something blowing up isn’t enough for a jury, but is enough for
reasonable support that you would find evidentiary support for negligence during discovery.
• HOWEVER, Iqbal didn’t have enough to make it reasonable to show discriminatory intent during discovery.
• MSG really likes this provision, don’t want fishing expeditions but also don’t want burden of evidence on
defendant before discovery.
• But plaintiffs and lawyers don’t use it because it’s admitting you don’t have evidence.
Docsity.com
