Month: November 2012

Sanctions Denied Even Where Corporation Forgets Requirements For Diversity Jurisdiction

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. KALENEVITCH, Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit 2012 – Google Scholar.

This unpublished decision affirms a denial of Rule 11 sanctions where Metropolitan Life filed a lawsuit in federal court to adjudicate a dispute of $24,093.

That amount is well short of the amount required for diversity jurisdiction, $75,000.

The sanctions motion was denied because the pro se litigant did not comply with Rule 11 as noted in this excerpt:

“Kalenevitch failed, however, to comply with Rule 11(c)(2), which requires that a sanctions motion be “made separately from any other motion,” and that it be served but not “filed or . . . presented to the court if the challenged [action] is withdrawn or appropriately corrected within 21 days after service[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(2). Kalenevitch did not present her sanctions motion separately from her motion for judgment on the pleadings, and she failed to serve the motion upon MetLife and wait twenty-one days before filing it. While MetLife objected to these procedural infirmities when it responded to the motion, Kalenevitch took no corrective action.”

Edward X. Clinton, Jr.