There was a problem locating the requested document.
Page 1
Case 1:98-cv-01265-AMD Document45 ~~ Filed 09/05/2000 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITER iP EATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRI MARYLAND 5ISTRICT OF MARYLAND ee OOP CONTRACTORS, CEP - -§ AG*) Plaintiff CLEJUUSOF FICE + ahr MORE
Before the court in this diversity of citizenship action is the defendants’ renewed motion for sanctions pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 26, seeking an award of attorney’s fees and costs on the ground that the prosecution of this action was frivolous and in bad faith. I reserved ruling on the motion pending completion of plaintiff's appeal of my grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants. The Fourth Circuit summarily affirmed the grant of summary judgment. See Brickwood Contractors, Inc. v. Datanet Engineering, Inc., 210 F.3d 360, 2000 WL 292641 (4th Cir., March 21, 2000) (unreported), aff’g, 1999 WL 1866854 (D.Md., May 10, 1999)(unreported).'
Sanctions are surely warranted here. See Poole ex rel. Elliott v. Textron, Inc., 192 F.R.D. 494, 507-09 (D.Md. 2000) (explicating Rule 11 standards); Adams vy. NVR Homes, Inc., 193 F.R.D. 257 (D.Md. 2000) (same); cf Davis v. Target Stores Div. of Dayton Hudson
'Defendants having failed to seek sanctions from the Court of Appeals, I do not deem it appropriate for me to consider whether the appeal itself added to the frivolousness of this proceeding. Cf Dyntel Corp. v. Ebner, 120 F.3d 488 (4th Cir. 1997),
Page 2
Case 1:98-cv-01265-AMD Document45 ~~ Filed 09/05/2000 Page 2 of 2
Corp., 87 F.Supp.2d 492 (D.Md. 2000) (employment discrimination claim). Even giving the plaintiff the benefit of the doubt as to the reasonableness of instituting the case in the first instance, the record makes clear that plaintiff pursued a wholly meritless interference with contractual relation claim, which it abandoned sub silentio in its response to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Furthermore, apart from mere assertions and arguments of counsel, plaintiff never developed evidence that the defamation claim could be supported by evidence of malice, a critical element of that claim. Thus, any reasonably competent attorney should have recognized that both claims should have been voluntarily dismissed by the close of discovery.
Defendants’ affidavits and other support for an award of fees and costs in an amount approaching $100,000 are insufficient to permit a detailed analysis of the propriety of an award for those portions of the fees and costs incurred after the close of discovery. In any event, however, the $15,000 insurance deductible paid by the defendants for fees and costs provides a reasonable benchmark and the award shall be in such amount.
Case 1:98-cv-01265-AMD Document45 ~~ Filed 09/05/2000 Page 2 of 2
Corp., 87 F.Supp.2d 492 (D.Md. 2000) (employment discrimination claim). Even giving the
plaintiff the benefit of the doubt as to the reasonableness of instituting the case in the first
instance, the record makes clear that plaintiff pursued a wholly meritless interference with
contractual relation claim, which it abandoned sub silentio in its response to the defendants’
motion for summary judgment. Furthermore, apart from mere assertions and arguments of
counsel, plaintiff never developed evidence that the defamation claim could be supported by
evidence of malice, a critical element of that claim. Thus, any reasonably competent attorney
should have recognized that both claims should have been voluntarily dismissed by the close
of discovery.
Defendants’ affidavits and other support for an award of fees and costs in an amount
approaching $100,000 are insufficient to permit a detailed analysis of the propriety of an
award for those portions of the fees and costs incurred after the close of discovery. In any
event, however, the $15,000 insurance deductible paid by the defendants for fees and costs
provides a reasonable benchmark and the award shall be in such amount.
An order follows.
\ >
Filed: September 5, 2000 Coda Ree
ANDRE M. DAVIS
United States District Judge
Third party AI contribution in government documents
Possible
Document content is reproduced directly from government sources. Some filings in our database may themselves contain AI-generated content submitted by third parties to government agencies.
Back to 
