Shapiro v. Lundhal et al
Filing
43
ORDER denying 37 MOTION for Sanctions filed by Eric Lundahl. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 8/9/2017. (mejlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/9/2017)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
LAWRENCE SHAPIRO,
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
v.
Case No. 16-cv-06444-MEJ
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS
Re: Dkt. No. 37
ERIC LUNDAHL, et al.,
Defendants.
12
13
Pending before the Court is Defendant Eric Lundahl’s Motion for Sanctions. See Mot.,
14
Dkt. No. 37. Plaintiff Lawrence Shapiro filed an Opposition (Dkt. No. 40), and Defendant filed a
15
Reply (Dkt. No. 41). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78(b) and Civil Local Rule 7-
16
1(b), the Court finds this matter suitable for disposition without oral argument and hereby
17
VACATES the August 17, 2017 hearing.
18
Lundahl argues Plaintiff Lawrence Shapiro violated Rule 11 and this Court’s Order that
19
any amendment of the First Amended Complaint be made in good faith and consistent with
20
counsel’s obligation under Rule 11. See Mot. As the Court’s Order Dismissing the Second
21
Amended Complaint (“SAC”) makes plain, admiralty jurisdiction can be a complicated question.
22
Order, Dkt. No. 38. Indeed, courts have found admiralty jurisdiction existed in situations that bore
23
some resemblance to the facts alleged in the SAC, i.e., where a plane crashed on land after
24
encountering trouble over navigable waters. See Order at 6-7. While the Court ultimately found
25
that the SAC did not plead facts sufficient to show admiralty jurisdiction existed, the Court cannot
26
find that Plaintiff’s amendment was not made in good faith and consistent with counsel’s
27
obligation under Rule 11.
28
1
Accordingly, the Court DENIES the Motion for Sanctions.
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
4
5
6
Dated: August 9, 2017
______________________________________
MARIA-ELENA JAMES
United States Magistrate Judge
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?