Comments on: Update: judge quashes Seidel subpoena

By: teqjack

teqjack — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:33:07 +0000

SIDEBAR (?) –

As part of an update on this, at all the news? we find that the people who started the `vaccine=autism` scare are accused of serious professional misconduct and at least one has admitted his “evidence” was – at least in part – a fraud.

By: SPO

SPO — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:35:17 +0000

Rule 11 sanctions are not enough. Shoemaker needs to spend time in jail for this egregious harassment.

By: wavemaker

wavemaker — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:00:35 +0000

As the parent of an Aspergers child (now 16 years old), I was solicited repeatedly to include him as a member of this class. I couldn’t be happier to have declined.

This is such egregious behavior, it ought to be dealt with in the most aggressive fashion possible.

By: E-Bell

E-Bell — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 06:48:10 +0000

dcuser,

I would imagine that it is indeed possible to recover attorneys’ fees, though I have no idea how likely it is for the court to impose such a sanction. A case like this one should be a no-brainer, but then again, I’m not a federal judge.

As to your other question, my guess would be that the court from which the subpoena was issued has jurisdiction consider sanctions and not the court in which the original suit is filed.

By: dcuser

dcuser — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:16:56 +0000

What are the possibilities for the recipients of the third party subpoenas to recover their attorneys’ fees? Would the district court where the subpoenas issued have jurisdiction over Rule 30 sanctions, or would that be for the district court considering the original lawsuit?