Ortego et al v Lummi Island Scenic Estates Community Club, Inc et al
Filing
276
ORDER denying Plaintiffs' 256 Motion for Sanctions, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (SWT)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
_______________________________________
)
CHARLES E. ORTEGO, et al.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
LUMMI ISLAND SCENIC ESTATES
)
COMMUNITY CLUB, INC., et al.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_______________________________________)
No. C14-1840RSL
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
14
This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs’ request for sanctions. Dkt. # 229 at 1815
22; Dkt. # 256. Plaintiffs seek sanctions for the repetition of unflattering statements regarding
16
their counsel, for raising arguments and making motions in bad faith (including vexatious
17
requests for sanctions), for discovery abuses, and for filing a motion near the holidays. Plaintiffs
18
also request an order directing defendants to destroy certain photographs taken during a property
19
inspection.
20
Plaintiffs do not identify the authority under which they seek an award of sanctions or the
21
destruction of evidence acquired during discovery. Even if the Court were to find that certain
22
arguments were frivolous (such as defendants’ request for sanctions under Rule 11), plaintiffs
23
provide no assistance in quantifying the harm caused by the conduct of which they complaint.
24
Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions is DENIED.
25
26
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS
1
Dated this 3rd day of April, 2017.
2
A
Robert S. Lasnik
3
United States District Judge
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS
-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?