September 09, 2003
Fox News' lawsuit intended to sabotage the publication of Al Franken's book Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right was prepared by Dori Ann Hanswirth, Tracy A. Tiska, and Katherine M. Bolger,
who are associates at Hogan & Hartson LLP, the law firm retained by Fox News.
Realitychecker.org is calling on the legal profession to Discourage Frivolous Lawsuits by Naming Names. (Patrick Nielsen Hayden doesn't call it "frivolous"; he says it is "political barratry." So does Avedon Carol.)
US District Court Judge Denny Chin declared of the lawsuit prepared and filed by Dori Ann Hanswirth, Tracy A. Tiska, and Katherine M. Bolger, all employed by Hogan & Hartson LLP, "This case is wholly without merit, both factually and legally."
Al Franken, the target of the lawsuit, said that the filing by Dori Ann Hanswirth, Tracy A. Tiska, and Katherine M. Bolger, all employed by Hogan & Hartson LLP, was "one of the stupidest briefs I've ever seen in my life."
C.E. Petit writes the publishing law blog Scrivener's Error. Petit says of Dori Ann Hanswirth, Tracy A. Tiska, and Katherine M. Bolger, all employed by Hogan & Hartson LLP, "The idiots who filed Fox v. Franken would, in Illinois, be required to turn themselves in to the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission for filing a lawsuit without a good faith basis in fact or law for the purpose of harrassment (or another improper purpose)."
Rule 11. Signing of Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to Court; Sanctions
(b) Representations to Court.
By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,--
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation;
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law;
(3) the allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on a lack of information or belief.
Posted by abostick at September 9, 2003 10:24 AM