- 7 -
On August 11, 1992, respondent and the petitioning partners
jointly moved for a continuance, which was granted on August 13,
1992.
On January 12, 1994, we again set this case for trial at the
trial session scheduled to commence in Washington, D.C., on
October 31, 1994.
On July 22, 1994, the petitioning partners moved for
sanctions on account of alleged discovery abuses and violations
by respondent (the motion for sanctions). Respondent objected to
the motion for sanctions. The petitioning partners replied to
that objection, alleging additional incidents of misconduct. The
petitioning partners alleged the following incidents of
misconduct by respondent:
(1) Destruction of documents potentially
discoverable by petitioners.
(2) Failure to comply with certain discovery
orders of the Court.
(3) General failure to provide timely, accurate,
and complete discovery.
(4) Breaches of grand jury secrecy.
(5) Bad-faith withholding of pre-grand jury
documents.
We considered each of the petitioning partners’ claims, and we
denied the motion for sanctions in its entirety.
On October 12, 1994, the petitioning partners again moved
for dismissal or alternative relief based upon alleged violations
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