- 4 -
magistrate first granted leave. In response, petitioner filed
another lawsuit naming the same defendants in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York. As a result of this
filing, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District issued
an order enjoining petitioner from filing further lawsuits
against those defendants. It also required petitioner to pay
costs in the form of defendants’ legal fees.
On January 11, 1991, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit affirmed the District Court’s order and imposed
additional sanctions of $1,000 upon petitioner. The Court of
Appeals determined that petitioner’s suit against the University
of Chicago, IBM Corp., Ernst & Whinney, and Weiner & Co. totally
lacked merit. The court observed:
Golub persists in filing duplicative claims that have
been conclusively found to be wholly lacking in merit.
He is a serial litigator whose conduct can no longer be
tolerated. Although we are aware of his pro se status,
we are convinced that measures must be taken to prevent
Golub from continuing to file such vexatious litigation
which unfairly burdens the parties he names as
defendants and the courts.
In addition to affirming the district court’s
award of attorney’s fees, we believe that the
imposition of sanctions is warranted to deter Golub
from continuing his attempts to harass. * * *
Accordingly, we conclude that the imposition of
damages in the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000)
is appropriate. Additionally, the Clerk of this Court
is directed not to accept any future filings by Golub,
except for filings seeking further review of our
decision herein, until the sanctions awarded by the
district court are satisfied in full. This disposition
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011