Opinion ID: 481372
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: conclusion

Text: 53 The Sec. 1983 defendants have requested that we assess fees and costs against the plaintiffs pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 38. We ordinarily do not grant such requests. Margoles v. Johns, 798 F.2d 1069, 1075 (7th Cir.1986). For an appeal to be frivolous within the meaning of Rule 38, the result must be obvious or the appellant's argument must be wholly without merit. Indianapolis Colts v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 775 F.2d 177, 184 (7th Cir.1985). Furthermore, for an award of sanctions to be justified, there must be some indication of the appellant's bad faith suggesting that the appeal was prosecuted with no reasonable expectation of altering the district court's judgment and for purposes of delay or harassment or out of sheer obstinacy. Reid v. United States, 715 F.2d 1148, 1155 (7th Cir.1983). Although we do not dispute that the Sec. 1983 claims were indeed weak, we do not believe that they were entirely groundless or that the Henrys' arguments were wholly without merit so as to warrant Rule 38 sanctions. Therefore defendants' request for fees and costs is denied. 54 For the reasons stated above, the district court's dismissal of the amended complaint is affirmed, but the order enjoining the pending state court action is reversed for lack of jurisdiction, each side to bear its own costs.