Lerner & Rowe National, PLLC v. Brandner Law Firm, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

LERNER & ROWE NATIONAL, PLLC CIVIL ACTION VERSUS No. 20-3228 MICHAEL S. BRANDNER, JR., ET AL. SECTION I ORDER

Before the Court is plaintiff’s motion1 for sanctions and an award of fees against the defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. Plaintiff argues that sanctions are warranted because the defendants’ February 9, 2021 Motion to Dismiss2 was “neither warranted by existing law nor supported by a non- frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law.”3

“A court may impose appropriate sanctions on an attorney or party that violates [Rule 11], but is not required to do so.” Uptown Grill, LLC v. Shwartz, No. 13-6560, 2021 WL 269710, at *5 (E.D. La. Jan. 27, 2021) (Milazzo, J.) (citing Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 11(b)); see also Bd. of Alderman of Town of Tutwiler, Miss. v. Miss., Office of State Auditor, 751 F. App’x 433, 437 (5th Cir. 2018) (per curiam) (finding no abuse of discretion where district court decline to provide analysis of motion for Rule 11 sanctions before denying). The Court does not find that the motion rose to the level R. Doc. No. 28.

2 R. Doc. No. 6.

3 R. Doc. No. 28-1, at 2. of frivolity required to merit sanctions. Accordingly, it declines to impose sanctions at this time. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion is DENIED.

New Orleans, Louisiana, May 5, 2021. wl M. AFRICK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE