Johnson v. Town of Greece, 6:23-cv-06441

Robert Johnson, former Deputy Commissioner of Public Works for the Town of Greece, sued the Town and its officials for, among other things, unpaid work allegedly performed for both municipal and non-municipal purposes.
Johnson asserts numerous claims, including RICO violations, FLSA violations (retaliation, minimum wage, overtime), New York Labor Law claims, torts, civil rights (Section 1983), and violations under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.
During discovery, the Town sought to access the cell phone contents of William Murphy, a Town Councilman, claiming Murphy had communicated with Johnson's attorney, Maureen T. Bass, and may have deleted evidence.
Murphy, by affidavit, denied any communication with or having deleted messages from Ms. Bass, and characterized the Town’s subpoena as harassment.
The court noted sharply conflicting factual representations by the Town and Murphy, raising potential Rule 11 issues regarding truthful candor to the court.
The court issued an Order to Show Cause regarding possible Rule 11 sanctions, granting parties a safe harbor to withdraw disputed representations by a set date, and requiring sworn explanations from counsel and parties involved.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Town misrepresented communications between Murphy and Bass	No such communication ever took place	Murphy claimed to have communicated; Town had corroborating evidence	Pending; order to show cause
Whether litigation hold to plaintiff’s attorney was issued for improper purpose	Litigation hold was a harassment tactic	Hold was based on a reasonable belief of relevant communications	Pending; order to show cause
Whether Town’s counsel met Rule 11 obligations in factual contentions	Town’s contentions lack factual support	Town stands by contentions as supported by interview and other evidence	Pending; parties must respond
Whether the court has authority to impose/ recommend Rule 11 sanctions in these circumstances	Appropriate for court to scrutinize representations	Rule 11 safe harbor not applicable for court-initiated sanctions	Magistrate to recommend if warranted

Motown Prods., Inc. v. Cacomm., Inc., 849 F.2d 781 (2d Cir. 1988) (court must resolve doubts in favor of attorney regarding Rule 11)
United States v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of Am., AFL-CIO, 948 F.2d 1338 (2d Cir. 1991) (Rule 11 applies to signed, filed court submissions and requires bad faith for sanctions)
In re Pennie & Edmonds LLP, 323 F.3d 86 (2d Cir. 2003) (sua sponte Rule 11 sanctions require bad faith)