← All Authorities
United States us whitebook bridge

Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.

496 U.S. 384 (1990)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
Year1990
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Rule 11 sanctions may be imposed after voluntary dismissal; abuse-of-discretion review of Rule 11 factual findings and sanction choices

Key Principle

Rule 11 sanctions may be imposed after voluntary dismissal; abuse-of-discretion review of Rule 11 factual findings and sanction choices

Area of Law

Civil Procedure — FRCP 11 sanctions

Related Cases

Willy v. Coastal Corp. 503 U.S. 131 (1992)

District court may impose Rule 11 sanctions even if it is later determined to have lacked subject-matter jurisdiction

Business Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Communications Enterprises, Inc. 498 U.S. 533 (1991)

Rule 11’s reasonable-inquiry certifications apply to a represented party who signs a paper, not only to attorneys

Chambers v. NASCO, Inc. 501 U.S. 32 (1991)

Inherent power to sanction bad-faith conduct exists alongside Rule 11 and statutes; use with caution and procedural safeguards

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp...