This is a ruling of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The district court granted plaintiff leave to amend and denied the Defendants’ Rule 11 motion. It explained:
It is clear from these filings that opposing counsel have struggled with civility in this litigation. However, the Court finds no evidence to support defendants’ allegation that plaintiff filed his Rule 59(e) motion purely to force defendants to expend time and money defending against plaintiff’s claims. The Court is unable to conclude that plaintiff brought the motion to alter judgment in bad faith, and therefore denies defendants’ motion for sanctions. See Roszkowiak v. Elk Grove Vill., No. 15 C 5207, 2015 WL 9259891, at *4 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 18, 2015) (denying defendants’ motion for Rule 11 sanctions and reasoning that “[j]ust because a claim is not well-supported does not mean the attorney has pled false facts or legal theory”).
The case is also significant because the court allowed a plaintiff to amend a complaint after judgment was entered for the defendants. The reason for the decision – plaintiff was not given an opportunity to amend previously.
Source: Briscoe v. VILLAGE OF VERNON HILLS, Dist. Court, ND Illinois 2017 – Google Scholar
fedcivilprocedure 