Buccola v. Boucher

Background

The court focused on statements Theresa I. Buccola made in filings and arguments about opposing counsel. The opinion lists descriptions such as “a rogue agent,” “fake and phantom counsel,” “fraudulent,” and “Criminal Thomas Fay.” It also says Buccola repeatedly accused opposing counsel of criminal, deceitful, and fraudulent behavior, including committing felonies and perjury.

The court stated that it had warned Buccola on July 8, 2024, about the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. Rule 11 requires a party who files a pleading, motion, or other paper to certify, after a reasonable inquiry, that it is not being presented for an improper purpose such as harassment, unnecessary delay, or needlessly increasing litigation costs. The court said Buccola had not followed that warning.

Order to show cause

Under Rule 11(c)(3), a court may order a lawyer, law firm, or party to explain why specifically described conduct did not violate Rule 11(b). The court ordered Buccola to provide a written explanation by September 3, 2024, addressing why her taunting of opposing counsel did not violate Rule 11(b).

The court said anger, frustration, disagreement, or dislike did not excuse disrespectful conduct. It stated that Buccola’s escalating attacks showed a lack of civility and respect and might amount to harassment under Rule 11(b). The court also said that arguments are considered based on their substance, not whether they are presented in a neutral or harsh tone.

Disposition

The court issued an order requiring Buccola to show cause. It did not determine in this order that she violated Rule 11 and did not impose sanctions. The court stated that if it later imposed a sanction, the sanction would be limited to what was sufficient to deter repetition of the conduct. The order was signed by Nathanael M. Cousins, United States Magistrate Judge.