• Federal Law of Sanctions: Rules 11 & 56, 28 U.S.C. § 1927, and Inherent Authority
  • April 28, 2011
  • Law Firm: Craig C. Reilly Esq. - Alexandria Office
  • The hallmark amendment regarding litigation sanctions also was enacted in 1983, when Rule 11 was amended to mandate compliance with an objective standard of conduct. See generally ADV. COM. NOTES, 97 F.R.D. 165, 196-201 (1983). Rule 11 was further modified in 1993—making sanctions discretionary, but broadening their reach. And since 1983, Rules 16(f) (1983 and 1993) and 26(g) (1983 and 1993) also have been added and fortified, specifying sanctions for particular pretrial, disclosure, and discovery misconduct. Furthermore, Rule 37 has been beefed-up with further amendments (1980 and 1993). Finally, pouring on even more accelerant, the Supreme Court expanded the “inherent power” of the federal judges to sanction litigation abuse and misconduct that was not otherwise addressed by a rule or statute. Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32 (1991). Where does that leave us today?