At what point will Trump's attorneys start risking serious court sanctions?

[StarfishSaver]

Trump's lawyers have been advancing and continue to advance some pretty ridiculous arguments. Two judges have made clear in just the last couple of days that they're having none of it and in no uncertain terms - or as one DUer put it "Get this sh*t out of my courtroom!"

If his lawyers keep pushing these bogus claims, they're leaving themselves open to some serious sanctions under Rule 11 of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, which prohibits attorneys from filing frivolous pleadings they know aren't reasonably rooted in law or fact and aren't intended to change or extend existing law. Rule 11 sanctions can range anywhere from court costs to paying the opposing party's attorney fees to hefty fines and other penalties. No attorney (or at least no attorney woeth their salt) wants to get socked with Rule 11 sanctions but Trump's lawyers are starting to dance dangerously close.

If they keep it up, we can expect to see judges slapping sanctions on them. I wonder at what point these attorneys will say "No" to their client.

Rule 11. Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions

(a) Signature. Every pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's name—or by a party personally if the party is unrepresented. The paper must state the signer's address, e-mail address, and telephone number. Unless a rule or statute specifically states otherwise, a pleading need not be verified or accompanied by an affidavit. The court must strike an unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly corrected after being called to the attorney's or party's attention.

(b) Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper—whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it—an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:

(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;

(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;

(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and

(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.

(c) Sanctions.

(1) In General. If, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond, the court determines that Rule 11(b) has been violated, the court may impose an appropriate sanction on any attorney, law firm, or party that violated the rule or is responsible for the violation. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm must be held jointly responsible for a violation committed by its partner, associate, or employee

[abqtommy]

1. They're taking the risk now and they'll probably double down

until the courts squash them like the bugs/vermin they are!

[StarfishSaver]

2. True, but courts give lawyers a lot of rope before they start to yank them back

[uponit7771]

3. Is it fair to say Red Don's crew has been takin an azz whoopin in court?

[StarfishSaver]

4. Si

[PJMcK]

5. Trump's lawyers are weird

No reputable law firms want to represent Trump. There are several reasons for this.

First, he's known as a dead-beat client who doesn't pay his bills or tries to negotiate them downwards.

Second, because of his well-known womanizing (and that's too polite), many law firms with women partners don't want the stank of Trump among their clients. These women/lawyers/partners are striking a feminist blow against Trump.

Third, Trump tries to micro-manage every detail of his legal position. That's a terrible strategy. The reason that even lawyers have lawyers is because a vigorous and strategic defense requires objectivity and emotional detachment. Those qualities are rendered useless when an unscrupulous client, like Trump, goads his counsel to act outside of acceptable legal practice.

Additionally, his lawyers suck. Their filings are flawed, their arguments are ludicrous and unfounded in settled law and their courtroom behavior hasn't endeared them to the judges adjudicating their cases. So far, it appears that they've lost nearly every case.

It's weird.

[StarfishSaver]

6. Yup to everything you said

[Gothmog]

7. The courts in both the Banking case and the accountant case made statements that

would have a sane lawyer worried about sanctions. In both cases, the court stated that their claims had no merit and did not make sense