Free Motion for Sanctions - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 28.8 kB
Pages: 3
Date: October 27, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 417 Words, 2,542 Characters
Page Size: 610 x 789.1 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22941/84.pdf

Download Motion for Sanctions - District Court of Connecticut ( 28.8 kB)


Preview Motion for Sanctions - District Court of Connecticut
I Case 3:03-cv-0101 1-AWT Document 84 Filed 10/28/2005 Page 1 of 3
I UNITED STATES DISTRICTCOURT l
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
NICHOLAS CAGGLANIELLO, NEIL CASE NO. 303 CV1 01 1(AWT)
HOWARD and THOMAS FALCO, on : V
behalf of themselves and all other similarly :
v_ situated employees of FSG PrivatAir, Inc. :
j 1>LA1NT11=1=s, 2
VS. ` :
FSG PRIVATAIR, INC. and in their
individual and official capacities DAVID C. :
HURLEY, HUGH F. REGAN, THOMAS H. :
MILLER and THOMAS L. CONNELLY : V
DEFENDAN TS.
OCTOBER 27, 2005

n Defendants FSG PrivatAir, Inc. ("PrivatAir"), David C. Hurley, Hugh F. Regan, Thomas H.
Miller and Thomas L. Connelly, by their attomey, move the court pursuant to F.R.C.P. 11 (c) for an
order imposing sanctions on the Plaintiffs’ attomey for violations of F.R.C.P. 11(b)(2) and (3). The
Court denied Defendants’ original Motion for Sanctions at oral argument on October 9, 2004 and
Renewed Motion for Sanctions by Order dated March 16, 2005 without prejudice. The Court
ordered the parties to conduct discovery on subject matter jurisdiction. Based on discovery, the
Defendants submit that Platiniffs’ attomey had no reasonable basis to assert claims under the Fair
Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and therefore, renew their Motion for Sanctions.
ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED
1

Case 3:03-cv—01 01 1-AWT Document 84 Filed 10/28/2005 Page 2 of 3
In requesting sanctions, the Defendants rely on their Second Renewed Motion to Dismiss filed
· simultaneously with the Court.
` Plaintiffs’ attomey should be sanctioned for filing a lawsuit with no reasonable basis in
law or fact that has no chance of success under existing law or extension thereof. Plaintiffs’
attomey failed to make a reasonable inquiry into the law and facts by asserting boilerplate
allegations with no factual support. Therefore, Plaintiffs’ attomey should be sanctioned under
F.R.C.P. 11.
Defendants submit the attached memorandum of law in support of their Second Renewed
Motion for Sanctions.
Respectfully Submitted,
THE FEN TS
By:
Joseph . Maya, Es t/ 17742
Russell J. Sweeting, sq. ct/24877
Maya & Associates, P. C.
- 266 Post Road East
Westport, CT 06880
Telephone: (203) 221-3100
_ Fax No: (203) 221-3199
-

Case 3:03-cv-0101 1-AWT Document 84 Filed 10/28/2005 Page 3 of 3
n
This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed this 27th day of October 2005 to:
James T. Baldwin, Esq.
Coles, Baldwin & Craft, LLC
1261 Post Road, P.O. Box 577
Fairfield, CT 06824
Russell J. Swectingg é
3 .