Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Where One of Two Papers Contained a Falsehood but Only One Was Filed in Court and It Was Unclear Which One Was False, Sanctions Denied

From Patel v. United States, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 21569 (5th Cir. Oct. 12, 2010):

Although the district court determined that the Clinical Director had provided false information in either the declaration or the referral request, it could not determine which document contained the false information. Thus, the district court did not order sanctions, but instead ordered that the BOP director receive a copy of its ruling so that it could conduct an inquiry and take any appropriate action. If the Clinical Director's declaration was true and his statements in the Referral Request false, the Government would not have violated Rule 11 because the Referral Request was not presented directly to the district court. We thus find that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Patel's motion for sanctions on this ground.

Share this article:


Recent Posts