In re Marathon Home Loans Federal Securities Litigation

995 F.2d 232 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. In re MARATHON HOME LOANS FEDERAL SECURITIES LITIGATION. Ernest MOENCH, et al., Plaintiff, Hill, Schwartz, Stenson, A Law Corporation, Appellant, v. METRO HOME LOANS, et al., Defendants, Arthur Young & Co., Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-15335. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 10, 1993. Decided June 3, 1993. Before REINHARDT, TROTT and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Hill, Schwartz, Stenson appeals the district court's award of Rule 11 sanctions in connection with an amended complaint which named Arthur Young as a defendant. We have jurisdiction, 1 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 * A district court's rulings on Rule 11 are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Townsend v. Holman Consulting Corp., 929 F.2d 1358, 1365-66 (9th Cir.1990) (en banc). "[A]n attorney violates Rule 11 whenever he signs a pleading, motion, or other paper without having conducted a…