Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-2104, SECTION "R" (5).
June 3, 2003.
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is the motion of defendant, Parish of Jefferson, to order Rule 11 sanctions against the plaintiff. For the following reasons, the Court DENIES defendant's motion for Rule 11 sanctions.
On June 30, 1999, the Parish sued plaintiff to correct violations of local ordinances found at his property. On July 23, 2001, a trial took place, but plaintiff did not appear. On August 17, 2001, Judge Olivier of the First Parish Court for the Parish of Jefferson entered judgment in favor of the Parish and ordered plaintiff to make all required repairs within ten days. On April 17, 2002, the Parish informed plaintiff that the violations at his property had been cleared.
In July of 2002, plaintiff sued the Parish, alleging the following: "Since March of 1998 through this date the Parish of Jefferson acting under the guise of law had denied me my civil rights, harassed me and denied me the pursuit of happiness guaranteed by the constitution. They have caused me mental, physical and monetary harm." (Pl.'s Compl. ¶ 1.) The rest of the complaint alleges specific acts by the Parish during this time period which plaintiff claims violated his civil rights. Defendant moved to dismiss all of plaintiff's claims as timebarred. In an order dated November 12, 2002, this Court granted defendant's motion in part, finding all but one claim timebarred. (Rec. Doc. No. 17.) In a second order dated June 2, 2003, the Court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff's remaining claim, finding that plaintiff did not state a claim upon which relief may be granted and that the claim was not based in fact. (Rec. Doc. No. 39.)
Defendant now seeks Rule 11 sanctions against plaintiff for bringing a frivolous lawsuit with no evidentiary support and without making a reasonable inquiry into the law. Defendant, however, did not comply with the mandates of Rule 11(c)(1)(A) in bringing this motion. Rule 11(c)(1)(A) provides:
A motion for sanctions under this rule shall be made separately from other motions or requests and shall describe the specific conduct alleged to violate subdivision (b). It shall be served as provided in Rule 5, but shall not be filed with or presented to the court unless, within 21 days after service of the motion (or such other period as the court may prescribe), the challenged paper, claim, defense, contention, allegation, or denial is not withdrawn or appropriately corrected . . .
FED. R. CIV. P. 11(c)(1)(A). Defendant does not represent to the Court, nor does the record reflect, that it first served plaintiff with its motion for Rule 11 sanctions and allowed plaintiff twenty-one days to voluntarily dismiss or appropriately correct the action. See, e.g., Dillon v. Diamond Offshore Mgmt. Co., 2002 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 20851, *6-7, *13-14 (E.D. La. 2002) (specifically noting that defendant complied with the mandates of Rule 11(c)(1)(A)). Further, although defendant represents to the Court that its motion for sanctions is warranted under the requirements of Rule 11, defendant omits the above-cited portion of Rule 11 from its anaylsis.
Because defendant did not comply with the strict notice requirements of Rule 11 and did not give plaintiff an opportunity to withdraw or correct his complaint before filing this motion with the Court, the Court DENIES defendant's motion for sanctions.