Today's sanctions horror story is
here, courtesy of 4/1:
- we are convinced this appeal is totally and
indisputably without merit and, therefore, sanctions are warranted. [Appellant]'s primary
argument on appeal was that the trial court erred when it determined the complaint was
frivolous. He concedes the complaint contains "seemingly unusual" allegations, but
asserts they are not outside "the realm of possibility" and do not describe "some
impossible sci-fi scenario." We cannot agree.
- references to matters outside the appellate record violate at least two Rules:
(1) Rule 8.204(a)(1)(C), which provides that each brief must "[s]upport any reference to a
matter in the record," and (2) Rule 8.204(a)(2)(C), which provides that the opening brief
must "[p]rovide a summary of the significant facts limited to matters in the record."
- we conclude sanctions are warranted in an
amount necessary to compensate taxpayers for the cost of processing, reviewing, and
deciding this frivolous appeal. Such sanctions typically range from $6,000 to $12,500 [cite], but have been imposed in amounts at
least as high as $25,000.
- Given the
outlandish arguments raised in this appeal and the extensive violations of the Rules in
Brown's appellate briefing, we believe a sanctions order of $15,000 is appropriate.
Posts
