An Empirical Study of Rule 11 Sanctions
Saul M. Kassin
1985, 81 pages
(In Print: Available for Distribution)
The results of a survey of 292 federal district judges concerning how they interpret and apply the 1983 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (before the 1993 amendments). Based on the judges' hypothetical reactions to actual cases in which Rule 11 sanctions were requested, the study outlines the judges' standards and rationales for imposing sanctions, the kinds of sanctions imposed, and the relationship between the judges' opinions and their expectations of how their colleagues would rule on the same issues.


Link or download
Table of contents
Table of Contents
    Executive Summary
    I. Introduction, 1
    Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 2
    The 1983 Amendments to Rule 11, 4
    Goals of the Present Research, 8
    II. Method, 11
    • Sample of Respondents, 11
    • Case Descriptions, 12
    • Questionnaires, 14
    III. Results, 17
    Standards for the Imposition of Sanctions, 18
    • Willful Versus Nonwillful Violations, 19
    • Subjective Faith Versus the Reasonableness of Inquiry, 21
    • A Comparison Between Willfulness and Bad Faith, 22
    • Demographic Differences in Sanctioning Standards, 23
    Rationales for the Imposition of Sanctions, 29
    Violations in Fact Versus Law, 32
    Judges' Beliefs About the Norms, 34
    Judges' Reports of Their Recent Sanctioning Activity, 36
    • Rule 11 Motions, 36
    • Rule 11 Sanctions, 36
    • Relationship Between Reported Activity and Hypothetical Decisions, 37
    Sanctions Other Than Attorneys' Fees, 39
    The Pro Se Litigant, 41
    IV. Conclusions, 45
    Appendix A: The Ten Case Descriptions, 47
    Appendix B: The Letter Sent to District Judges, 69
    Appendix C: A Version of the Questionnaires, 73
    Table of Cases, 79
    List of Tables
    1. Number and Percentage of Active Judges in Each Circuit Who Participated in the Study
    2. References for the Ten Cases Used in the Study
    3. Case-by-Case Breakdown of the Percentage of Affirmative Answers to Study Questions 1, 2, 3a, and 3b
    4. Number of Judges in Each Case Who Responded Within the Three Categories Produced by Combining Questions 1 and 2
    5. Raw Number and Percentage of Judges by Violation Category Who Would Award Fees Under Rule 11
    6. Number of Judges in Each Case Who Fell into the Three Categories Produced by Question 10
    7. Raw Number and Percentage of Judges in Each of the Three State-of-Mind Categories Who Would Award Fees Under Rule 11
    8. Cross-Classification of Respondents in the Two Subjective Categories
    9. Comparison of the Major Results According to Levels of Experience on the Bench
    10. Comparison of the Major Results Among the Twelve Circuits
    11. Four-Tiered Model Describing Judges' Rulings on Rule 11 Motions for Sanctions
    12. Rank Orders Chosen for Each of the Three Rationales
    13. Sanctioning Activity of Judges According to Their Primary Rationale
    14. Sanction Rulings as a Function of the Adequacy of Inquiry into the Facts and the Law
    15. Judges' Expectations Regarding Sanctions Compared with the Actual Frequency of Sanction Motions Granted in Each Case
    16. Major Results for the Pro Se and Counsel Versions of Case

More on the Subject(s):
Sanctions