Comments on: “Big law firm picks up Little Guy in sweep for defendants”

By: Alan Thompson

Alan Thompson — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:45:39 +0000

Walters Bender et al should be required to eat the $4,000, since it was their error in filing that named the wrong defendant. Perhaps making the attorneys liable for mistakes such as this will slow the flood of lawsuits, eh?

By: Ted

Ted — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 02:54:38 +0000

Like modern Rule 11, Missouri Rule 55.03 is toothless. It requires the victimized party to expend legal fees to draft a lengthy motion for sanctions, and then there's a thirty-day grace period for the victimizer to withdraw the offending claims. And if the withdrawal happens, there's no right of recovery of attorney's fees.

By: David Nieporent

David Nieporent — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 02:36:32 +0000

I’m pretty sure Rule 11 requires that an attorney investigate claims made in any paper submitted to the court. “Reasonable inquiry under the circumstances,” if I remember the language. Perhaps Solomon should have approached the issue from that angle. Of course, it’s probably too late if he already has been dropped.

By: Sean O'Brien

Sean O'Brien — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 01:24:41 +0000

malice–maybe not in the sense of being malicious, but certainly in the sense of willful indifference to the other guy. It would be fun to be a judge in this case. I’d have a lot of fun asking the questions of the attorneys who filed the suit. Hell, I’d want to talk to all of them in court.