§Why CasetextPricing

Pinson v. Midland Funding LLC et al

RESPONSE to Motion re MOTION to Declare John Pinson a Vexatious Litigant and for Order to Post Bond

6 Cited authorities

  1. Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper

    447 U.S. 752 (1980)   Cited 2,845 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may impose attorney's fee sanction against opposing counsel for “abusive litigation practices” only in “narrowly defined circumstances,” including where the court makes a finding that “counsel's conduct ... constituted or was tantamount to bad faith”

  2. Thomas v. Capital Sec. Services, Inc.

    836 F.2d 866 (5th Cir. 1988)   Cited 671 times
    Holding that the abuse of discretion standard applies "across-the-board to all issues in Rule 11 cases"

  3. Baker v. Alderman

    158 F.3d 516 (11th Cir. 1998)   Cited 258 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court should take into account a party's ability to pay when determining the amount of monetary sanctions to be awarded

  4. Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co.

    303 U.S. 197 (1938)   Cited 96 times
    Noting that pleadings should not raise barriers to fair and just settlements

  5. Local 938 Joint H. W. Tr., v. B.R. Starnes

    827 F.2d 1454 (11th Cir. 1987)   Cited 47 times
    Holding that ERISA's definition of employer does not include persons other than signatory employers

  6. Daeufer-Lieberman Brewing Co. v. United States

    8 F.2d 1 (3d Cir. 1925)   Cited 25 times
    In Daeufer-Lieberman Brewing Co. Inc. v. United States, 8 F.2d 1, the Third Circuit held that a seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment would not sustain a libel for forfeiture. That decision is in conflict with the authorities we have cited other than In re Phoenix Cereal Beverage Co., 2 Cir., 58 F.2d 953, and with all deference we think that it ought not to be followed.