Bridges v. Diesel Service, Inc.

1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9429 (E.D. Pa. 1994)


Bridges (P) brought an action against Diesel Service, Inc. (D) under the American Disabilities Act 42 U.S.C. Section 12101. P claimed D violated the ADA by terminating his employment. The ADA requires that a party exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a complaint. P did not do this and failed to file a complaint with the EEOC as required under the ADA. That complaint was dismissed by the trial court because P failed to exhaust the administrative remedies by not filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission until after he commenced the present action. D then moved for sanctions under Rule 11. D claimed a violation of Rule 11(b)(2). When an attorney brings a complaint before a court they are certifying that to the attorney’s best knowledge, information and belief, formed after a reasonable inquiry, that the claims presented as warranted under existing law. A court has the discretion to award sanctions under Rule 11(c). That motion was denied.