Issue: Must a claim for sanctions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1927 be denied where the moving party has offered no subjective evidence of the other attorney’s bad faith?
| Area of Law: | Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Litigation & Procedure |
| Keywords: | Sanctions; Subjective evidence of bad faith |
| Jurisdiction: | Federal |
| Cited Cases: | 78 F.3d 431 |
| Cited Statutes: | 28 U.S.C. § 1927 |
| Date: | 02/01/2001 |
To the extent that Defendants may seek sanctions pursuant to § 1927 for alleged tactics employed or filings made after commencement of a case, such a motion must be denied. To establish a claim for sanctions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 the movant must establish, inter alia, “subjective bad faith.” In re Keegan Management Co. Secs. Litig., 78 F.3d 431, 436 (9th Cir. 1996).
[S]ection 1927 sanctions “must be supported by a finding of subjective bad faith.” “Bad faith is present when an attorney knowingly or recklessly raises a frivolous argument, or argues a meritorious claim for the purpose of harassing an opponent.” For sanctions to apply, if a filing is submitted recklessly, it must be frivolous, while if it is not frivolous, it must be intended to harass. Thus, while it is true that reckless filings may be sanctioned, and nonfrivolous filings may also be sanctioned, reckless nonfrivolous filings, without more, may not be sanctioned.
Id. (citations omitted).
[…]