Laura K. Davis, et al. - Page 34




                                       - 34 -                                         
          Model Rules and, thus, has intentionally abused the judicial                
          process.  If by that conduct he has multiplied the proceedings,             
          he is deserving of sanctions for unreasonably and vexatiously               
          multiplying the proceedings within the meaning of section                   
          6673(a)(2).  See Red Carpet Studios Div. of Source Advantage,               
          Ltd. v. Sater, supra.                                                       
                    4.  Multiplication of the Proceedings                             
               These proceedings should never have been brought.  All of              
          respondent’s costs are, thus, in a sense, excessive.  There is,             
          however, some disagreement among the Courts of Appeals in                   
          interpreting 28 U.S.C. sec. 1927 as to whether it is only                   
          possible to multiply, or prolong, the proceedings after a case              
          has been initiated; presumably because an attorney cannot begin             
          to multiply the proceedings until some proceeding has come into             
          existence for the attorney to multiply.  Compare Moore v. Keegan            
          Mgmt. Co., 78 F.3d 431, 435 (9th Cir. 1996) (28 U.S.C. sec. 1927            
          “applies only to unnecessary filings and tactics once a lawsuit             
          has begun”), with In re TCI Ltd., 769 F.2d 441, 448 (7th Cir.               
          1985) (under 28 U.S.C. sec. 1927, trial judge “had the authority            
          to award the fees incurred right from the beginning”).  We have             
          not addressed the analogous issue under section 6673(a)(2), and             
          we are not compelled to do so today since, with respect to                  
          respondent’s costs incurred in responding to the first pleadings            
          (i.e., answering the petitions), there is adequate basis under              







Page:  Previous  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007