Keitel v. D'Agostino, Sr.

Background

The court had previously imposed monetary and non-monetary sanctions on plaintiffs Frederick J. Keitel, III and Spencer Robbins, Esq. because of what it described as egregious misconduct. The earlier sanctions order required Keitel to pay a $1,000 fine to the Clerk of Court; required Keitel and Robbins, jointly and severally, to pay defendants’ reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs; and required Keitel to file a copy of the sanctions order in every pending case in which he was involved.

Keitel appealed the sanctions order but did not ask the court to pause it during the appeal. The sanctioned plaintiffs did not pay the attorneys’ fees and costs previously awarded to FJK-TEE JAY, LTD. ($92,037.91) or to Fox Rothschild, LLP and Heather Ries ($103,308.88). Keitel also failed to file the sanctions order in his pending cases. The court previously chose not to hold him in contempt for that failure.

After the Court of Appeals dismissed Keitel’s appeal on April 16, 2025, the $1,000 fine remained undisturbed. The district court had warned that the fine would increase by $100 for each day Keitel failed to pay. LTD then moved for an order requiring the sanctioned plaintiffs to explain why they should not be held in contempt for failing to pay LTD’s award. LTD alternatively requested entry of judgment for that amount.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that it had authority to enter judgment immediately for the attorneys’ fees and costs awarded as sanctions. It relied on its broad discretion to impose appropriate sanctions for litigation misconduct and found that the sanctioned plaintiffs’ refusal to comply justified immediate enforcement. The court declined to limit the relief to LTD and also directed entry of judgment for the fees and costs awarded to the Fox Defendants.

The court also directed entry of judgment on the fine that had accrued against Keitel. It found no realistic possibility that continuing to increase the daily fine would persuade him to comply, based on his conduct and history of noncompliance. The court therefore discontinued the daily $100 increase and set the accrued fine at $8,100, consisting of the original $1,000 plus $100 for each of the 71 days since the appellate mandate issued.

Disposition

Judge Jesse M. Furman granted LTD’s motion for entry of judgment. The Clerk was directed to terminate ECF No. 191 and enter three immediately enforceable final judgments: one in favor of LTD against Keitel and Robbins for attorneys’ fees and costs; one in favor of the Fox Defendants against Keitel and Robbins for $103,308.88 in attorneys’ fees and costs; and one in favor of the Clerk of Court for $8,100, enforceable by any defendant on the court’s behalf.

The opinion contains inconsistent figures for LTD’s judgment. Earlier, it identifies LTD’s award as $92,037.91; the body later states $92,0370.90; and the final directive states $92,037.9. This summary reports the discrepancy rather than resolving it.