Progress Federal Savings Bank v. National West Lenders Association, Inc.

1996 WL 57942 (E.D. Pa 1996)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Progress (P) sued National West (D) for fraud, misrepresentation, intentional interference with contractual relations and civil conspiracy. The court dismissed the fraud and misrepresentation claims for a failure to state a claim under which relief could be granted. Five months later, D moved for summary judgment, and it was granted on all the remaining claims. Three months later D filed a rule 11 motion for sanctions. After waiting the required 21 days, D filed a motion for sanctions with the court. P moved to strike the sanctions in that D failed to comply with the procedural requirements of Rule 11. The court treated the motion to strike the sanctions as a motion in opposition to the Rule 11 motion of D. D contends that it told P repeatedly that its claims were groundless, gave P ample time for corrective action, and that D gave P the required 21-day formal notice before filing for sanctions. P contends that D prepared and served its motion too late.