Thomas Land & Development, LLC v. Vratsinas Construction Company

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THOMAS LAND & DEVELOPMENT, Case No.: 18-CV-1896-AJB-NLS

LLC,

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S v. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS VRATSINAS CONSTRUCTION (Doc. No. 10) 14 COMPANY, an Arkansas corporation; et al., Defendants. 17 Defendant moves the Court for sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 arguing Plaintiff “assert[ed] claims against defendant Vratsinas Contruction Company [ ] that even a cursory investigation would have revealed are both factually and legally groundless. . . .” (Doc. No. 10-1 at 4.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 provides in pertinent part, that when an attorney presents a signed paper to a court that attorney is certifying that to the best of his or her “knowledge, information and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances ... the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by nonfrivolous argument for extending,…