Summary

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Business Guides Inc. v. Chromatic Communications Enterprises Inc…

Where a represented party appends its signature to a document that a reasonable inquiry into the facts would have revealed to be without merit, we see no reason why a District Court should be powerless to sanction the party in addition to, or instead of, the attorney. See Wright & Miller § 1336,at 104. A contrary rule would establish a safe harbor such that sanctions could not be imposed where an attorney, pressed to act quickly, reasonably relies on a client's careless misrepresentations.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Sandra Day O'Connor Sandra Day O'Connor Business Guides Inc. v. Chromatic Communications Enterprises Inc…

A corporate entity, of course, cannot itself sign anything; it can act only through its agents. It would be anomalous to determine that an individual who is represented by counsel falls within the scope of Rule 11, but that a corporate client does not because it cannot itself sign a document. In any event, the question need not be resolved definitely here; Business Guides concedes that it did not raise this argument in the courts below.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature