Opinion
1:21-cv-5-MOC-DSC
04-25-2022
DANTE MURPHY, Plaintiff, pro se, v. CLEVELAND COUNTY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Max O. Cogburn Jr. United States District Judge
THIS MATTER is before the Court on pro Plaintiff Dante Murphy's Motion for Sanctions under Rule 11 against Attorney Stephanie Webster, (Doc. 63).
This is the second time Plaintiff has filed a motion for sanctions against attorney Webster in this action. The Court also denied his previous motion.
Plaintiff's motion is DENIED for the reasons stated in Defendant's brief in opposition. See (Doc. No. 64). That is, as Defendant explains in its brief, not only is Plaintiff's motion patently frivolous, but it is also procedurally inappropriate and directly contrary to a prior Order of the Court in this matter.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions against Attorney Stephanie Webster, (Doc. No. 63), is DENIED.