Free Motion for Sanctions - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Q I I
. » Case 3:03-cv-010]/1=6lWT Document 47 Filed O4/%7—5004 Page 1 of 3
vi \\h-/tr N
F ILEI3 I 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT I
DISTRIC
T OF CONNECTICUT muh APH 2 .I A H: I 5 I
° IIS t!¢"“i>=‘·‘ {Igor I
NICHOLAS CAGGIANIELLO, NEIL ; CASE N0. 303cvH 0i-I;(}AI7t;ITI·I.·:I. "
HOWARD and THOMAS FALCO, on ; ‘ I · —’ ··
behalf of themselves and all other similarly ;
situated employees of FSG PrivatAir, Inc. : I
1>LA1NT11¤1¤s, I I
VS. Q
FSG PRIVATAIR, INC. and in their I
individual and official capacities DAVID C. :
HURLEY, HUGH F. REGAN, THOMAS H. : I
MILLER and THOMAS L. CONNELLY :
DEFENDANTS.
APRIL 26, 2004
DEFENDANTS’ RENEWED MOTION FOR SANCTIONS I
Defendants F SG PrivatAir, Inc. ("PrivatAir"), David C. Hurley, Hugh F. Regan, Thomas H.
Miller and Thomas L. Connelly, by their attorney, move the court pursuant to F.R.C.P. ll (c) for an
order imposing sanctions on the Plaintiffs’ attorney for violations of F.R.C.P. 1 l(b)(2) and (3).
Your Honor denied Def`endants’ original Motion for Sanctions at oral argument on October 9, I
I
2004, but subsequently ordered the parties to conduct discovery on subj ect matter jurisdiction. I
Based on discovery, the Defendants submit that Platinif`fs’ attorney had no reasonable basis to assert
claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and therefore, renew their Motion for
Sanctions. In requesting Sanctions, the Defendants rely on their Renewed Motion to Dismiss filed
simultaneously with the Court. I
I
ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED ` -
I I
I
I
“;""“ f—r————— r A
__ W
"_`*———————— . QT ig gg __ __
gk __

I
I · l Case 3:03-cv-O10@WT Document 47 Filed O4/@004 Page 2 of 3 I
I I
o I
PIaintiffs’ attorney should be sanctioned for filing a lawsuit with no reasonable basis in I
law or fact that has no chance of success under existing law or extension thereof. Plaintiffs’
[ attorney failed to make a reasonable inquiry into the law and facts by asserting boilerplate
allegations with no factual support. Therefore, Plaintiffs’ attomey should be sanctioned under
I F.R.C.P. 11. I
Defendants submit the attached memorandum of law in support of their Renewed Motion =
for Sanctions. I
Respectfully Submitted, I
THE DEFENDANTS I
I
By: I
Joseph C. Maya, sq. ct/17742
Russell J. Sweeting, Esq. ct/24877 =
Maya & Associates, P. C. I
183 Sherman Street
Fairfield, CT 06824
Telephone: (203) 255-5600 I
Fax No: (203) 255-5699 I
I
I
2 I
. I
“ I

l
l -4 - Case 3:03-cv-O10@WT Document 47 Filed O4/@004 Page 3 of 3
R csimpicmon
This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed this 26th day of April 2004 to: I
James T. Baldwin, Esq.
Coles, Baldwin & Craft, LLC l
p 1261 Post Road, P.O. Box 577
l F airfield, CT 06824
Russell J. Sweetin?
l
l

1
l
3 l
l
l