Deandra Grant v. Nat'l College for Dui Defense

Good Law
586 F. App'x 693
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 201412-56622California256 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Okorie Okorocha, an attorney representing plaintiff Deandra Grant, appeals pro se from the district court’s order imposing sanctions on Okorocha under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion, Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 405 , 110 S.Ct. 2447 , 110 L.Ed.2d 359 (1990), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by sanctioning Okorocha under Rule 11 because the record supports the conclusion that Okorocha was not a proper plaintiff in his client’s action and filed the amended pleading for the improper purpose of maintaining venue in the district court. See Sneller v. City of Bainbridge Island, 606 F.3d 636, 638-39 (9th Cir.2010) (“Rule 11 authorizes a court to impose a sanction on any attorney, law firm, or party that brings a claim for an improper purpose or without support in law or evidence.”); Hudson v. Moore Bus. Forms, Inc., 836 F.2d 1156 , 1163 (9th Cir.1987) (district court is entitled to broad discretion in setting the amount of a fee award).

We reject Okorocha’s contention that the district court abused its discretion by awarding…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.