Source: http://www.xenu-directory.net/mirrors/www.whyaretheydead.net/lisa_mcpherson/legal/5D-040510.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 18:38:17+00:00

Document:
limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
instant appeal, the merits having long since been determined.
n1 See Religious Tech. Ctr. v. Liebreich, 339 F.3d 369, 376 (5th Cir.
2003), cert. denied, 157 L. Ed. 2d 899, 124 S. Ct. 1085 (2004).
Estate's post-remand motion for sanctions against RTC and its counsel.
n3 Id. at 371 n.2.
n5 Mercury Air Group, Inc. v. Mansour, 237 F.3d 542, 548, 549 (5th Cir.
106, 109 (5th Cir. 1994).
sanctioned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 is well taken in  [*6]  part.
repeated, frivolous motions to be both unreasonable and vexatious.
sanction for their unreasonable and vexatious conduct.
F.3d 472, 484-85 (5th Cir. 2002).
without giving any explanation whatsoever is reversible Court. error.
have to consider the motion afresh on the basis of the cold record.
regardless of  [*10]  the district court's ruling.
n10 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (2000).
n11 Baulch v. Johns, 70 F.3d 813, 817 (5th Cir. 1995).
n13 DeBauche, 191 F.3d at 511.
attorney's fees generated by their conduct.
n14 Travelers Ins. Co. v. St. Jude Hosp., 38 F.3d 1414, 1416 (5th Cir.
to correct manifest errors of law or fact."
administration of justice; they simply will not be tolerated.
therefore warrants § 1927 sanctions.
without saying, though, that this is no excuse for counsel's behavior.
n16 Mercury Air Group, 237 F.3d at 549.
Our review of the record confirms the accuracy of this finding.
Corp., 812 F.2d 393, 395 (8th Cir. 1987)).
least one-sixth of the hours expended by RTC's lawyers was the "excess"
convenient forum and one with obvious jurisdiction.
n19 See RTC I, 339 F.3d at 374-76.
For its part, the Estate advances four issues on appeal. None has merit.
it "shall be construed in accordance with Florida law."
voluntarily dismiss the case: Our judgment in RTC I did that.
n21 Thornber v. City of Fort Walton Beach, 568 So. 2d 914, 919 (Fla.
1990); Landry v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 731 So. 2d 137, 139 (Fla.
Dist. Ct. App. 1999); Prescott v. Anthony, 803 So. 2d 835, 836-37 (Fla.
Dist. Ct. App. 2001); Ajax Paving Indus., Inc. v. Hardaway Co., 824 So.
2d 1026, 1029 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002).
attorney's fees and costs under the contract.
Bay Developers, Inc., 411 So. 2d 1323, 1324 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982).
which the attorney's fees are recoverable").
discretion in denying the Estate costs under § 1919.
n25 See FED. R. APP. P. 39.
conditions and circumstances relevant to a given case).
n27 See FLA. STAT. ANN. § 57.105 (West 2004). See generally Visoly v.
Security Pac. Credit Corp., 768 So. 2d 482, 490-91 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
post-remand motion for sanctions is affirmed.
n28 See supra note 9 and accompanying text.
their law firm of Dandar & Dandar, P.A., jointly and severally.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and RENDERED.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 1927
 § 1927
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1927
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1919
 § 57
 v.