Laura K. Davis, et al. - Page 28
- 28 -
no way responsible for the decisions made in connection with the
initiation or prosecution of these cases. Ms. Lacorte agrees
with that description of her relationship to Mr. Jones.
We accept that Mr. Jones is principally responsible for the
decisions of counsel made in these cases, and Ms. Lacorte, his
employee, at all times worked under his direction and control.
We shall hold only Mr. Jones financially responsible for the
excessive costs we determine.
2. Requirements for an Award of Excess Costs
Section 6673(a)(2) plainly imposes three prerequisites to an
award of excess costs. First, the attorney or other practitioner
(without distinction, attorney) must engage in “unreasonable and
vexatious” conduct. Second, that “unreasonable and vexatious”
conduct must be conduct that “multiplies the proceedings.”
Finally, the dollar amount of the sanction must bear a financial
nexus to the excess proceedings; i.e., the sanction may not
exceed the “costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees reasonably
incurred because of such conduct.” See Amlong & Amlong, P.A. v.
Denny's, Inc., 457 F.3d 1180, 1190 (11th Cir. 2006) (with
reference to the analogous language of 28 U.S.C. sec. 1927).
Page: 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Last modified: November 10, 2007