SAN FRANCISCO When Gregory Haynes faced $360,000 in sanctions for litigation misconduct, he argued to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White that he couldn’t afford to pay it. Haynes, a San Francisco solo practitioner, claimed he had no assets and income of only $20,000 a year.
White sanctioned him anyway, pointing to a Seventh Circuit decision by Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook that an attorney’s ability to pay should have no bearing on sanctions, which are meant not only to deter misconduct but also compensate the litigation opponent for wasted time and money.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
