Christian v. Mattell, Inc.

286 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir. 2003)

What's Going On?

Plaintiff's attorney appeals from sanctions awarded pursuant to FRCP 11 for filing a meritless claim and for misconduct such as misstatements and discovery abuses made during an oral presentation in a case where Plaintiff alleges that dolls created by Defendant infringe upon the copyright of dolls created by Plaintiff.

Who's Who?

Plaintiff     :

Claudene Christian – creator and marketer of the collegiate cheerleader doll, “Claudene.”

Defendant :

Mattell, Inc. – creator and marketer of Barbie Dolls that allegedly infringed upon Plaintiff's doll.

Facts:

Plaintiff Claudene Christian filed a complaint against Defendant Mattel, Inc., alleging that Defendant's “Cool Blue” and “Virginia Tech” Barbie dolls infringed the copyright of Plaintiff's collegiate cheerleader doll, “Claudene.” The Claudene doll was created by Plaintiff in 1996 and copyrighted in 1997. Defendant's “Cool Blue” and “Virginia Tech” Barbie dolls were copyrighted in 1991 and 1976, respectively. Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that Defendant's [dolls] predated Plaintiff's doll and therefore could not infringe it as a matter of law. After unsuccessfully attempting to convince Plaintiff's attorney, James Hicks, to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit, Defendant additionally moved for sanctions against Hicks pursuant to FRCP 11, arguing that Hicks had filed a frivolous complaint. The district court granted both of Defendant's motions. The court found that the Rule 11 sanctions were justified because Hicks had filed a meritless claim due to his failure to investigate; that he had tossed Barbie dolls off of a table in a pretrial meeting; and that he had made various misstatements and misrepresentations to the court. The court awarded Defendant $505,565 in attorney's fees. Hicks appeals, arguing that misconduct such as misstatements and discovery abuses made during an oral presentation cannot be sanctioned under Rule 11.

Issue:

Does FRCP 11 permit a court to sanction an attorney for misconduct such as misstatements and discovery abuses made during an oral presentation?

Decision:

No. FRCP 11 permits the court to sanction an attorney for conduct regarding pleadings, written motions, and other papers that have been signed and filed in a given case, but it does not authorize sanctions for discovery abuses or misstatements made to the court during an oral presentation. Although Hicks was sanctioned in part for the meritless complaint that he signed, the court order suggests that the sanctions were also based on conduct outside of the pleadings. Although Hicks' outlandish conduct raises questions about his respect for the judicial process, Rule 11 sanctions are limited to papers signed in violation of the rule. Conduct in discovery meetings of counsel and oral representations at hearings do not fall within the ambit of Rule 11. Because the district court may have granted the Rule 11 motion based, in part, on Hicks' extrinsic misconduct, the Rule 11 orders are vacated and remanded.

Basic Rule:

Rule 11 permits the court to sanction an attorney only for conduct regarding pleadings, written motions, and other papers that have been signed and filed in a given case.

Home  |  Briefs  |  Glossary  |  Contact Us