Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01049/USCOURTS-ca10-89-01049-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 422
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158
Cause of Action: 

---

I 

.. FILED 

United States Court of Appe 

'Tenth Circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

JUN 2 0 19 

&OBERT L. HOECKB 

Clerk 

In Re: DONALD R. McINTOSH 

and JUNE V. McINTOSH, 

Debtors, 

GARY J. GOKEY and DEBORAH 

GOKEY, 

Creditors-Appellants, 

vs. 

DON McINTOSH, SR. and JUNE 

McINTOSH, 

Debtor-Appellees. 

No. 89-1049 

(D.C. No. 88-B-1317) 

(D. Colo.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before ANDERSON, BALDOCK and EBEL, Circuit Judges.** 

Bradley P. Pollock, an attorney at law, appeals from an order 

of the district court awarding attorney's fees in the amount of 

$2,475 to opposing counsel. Pollock previously had been assessed 

attorney's fees of $2,029 for conduct arising out of his 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause therefore is ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Appellate Case: 89-1049 Document: 010110036881 Date Filed: 06/20/1990 Page: 1 
/ 

representation of the creditors in this bankruptcy matter. In re 

McIntosh, 89 B.R. 144, 149 (Bkrtcy D. Colo. 1988). On appeal, the 

district court held that Pollock's slovenly performance before the 

bankruptcy court fully warranted the imposition of attorney's 

fees. Moreover, the court found that Pollock displayed "the same 

deficient conduct" before the district court as he displayed in 

the bankruptcy proceeding and consequently assessed additional 

attorney's fees of $2,475 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and 28 

u.s.c. § 1927. Pollock appealed both the original fee assessment 

in the bankruptcy court and the additional fee assessment by the 

district court. However, in an order filed October 6, 1989, this 

court dismissed Pollock's appeal as to all issues except for the 

district court's assessment of additional fees. 

Section 1927 provides that "[a]n attorney ... who so 

multiplies the proceedings in any case unreasonably and 

vexatiously may be required by the court to satisfy personally the 

excess costs, expenses and attorney's fees reasonably incurred 

because of such conduct." 28 U.S.C. § 1927. Section 1927 applies 

to "multiplicative litigation tactics that are harassing, 

dilatory, or otherwise 'unreasonable and vexatious."' Jones v. 

Continental Corp., 789 F.2d 1225, 1230 (6th Cir. 1986}; see,~, 

Warner Bros. v. Dae Rim Trading, 877 F.2d 1120, (2d Cir. 1989} 

(repeated citations to unreported cases in brief justifies 

sanctions under§ 1927). A court may assess fees under§ 1927 

"when an attorney knows or reasonably should know that a claim 

pursued is frivolous, or that his or her litigation tactics will 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-1049 Document: 010110036881 Date Filed: 06/20/1990 Page: 2 
needlessly obstruct the litigation of nonfrivolous claims .... " 

Jones, 798 F.2d at 1230. Such assessments are reviewed for abuse 

of discretion. Id. at 1229. 

Here, Pollock displayed the same vexatious conduct in the 

district court as he did before the bankruptcy court. Pollock 

untimely sought to amend his statement of issues and designation 

of record without leave of court. His brief was filed late and 

only after the debtors filed a motion to dismiss. Finally, the 

brief not only failed to address the issues raised previously in 

the statement of issues but also raised issues that had not been 

preserved for appeal. We cannot say that the district court 

abused its discretion in concluding that this unprofessional 

conduct was sufficiently unreasonable and vexatious to justify an 

award of attorney's fees under§ 1927. 

AFFIRMED. 

Entered for the Court 

Bobby R. Baldock 

-3-

Appellate Case: 89-1049 Document: 010110036881 Date Filed: 06/20/1990 Page: 3