Universitas Education, LLC v. Nova Group, Inc.

Background

Universitas Education, LLC moved for sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 against Roger Stavis, Esq., and Mintz & Gold LLP. Rule 11 allows a court to impose sanctions for certain improper filings or litigation conduct. The motion concerned Stavis and Mintz & Gold’s representation of Grist Mill Capital, LLC in connection with Grist Mill’s motion under Rule 60(b) to vacate a Turnover Judgment issued by the court in August 2014.

The court denied Grist Mill’s Rule 60(b) motion in a September 28, 2021 Memorandum Opinion and Order. Grist Mill, through separate counsel, appealed that decision to the Second Circuit, and the appeal remained pending when the court considered Universitas’s sanctions motion. The opinion also states that Mintz & Gold had withdrawn as Grist Mill’s counsel effective June 2, 2021.

Court’s Reasoning

The court recognized that, in some circumstances, a district court may consider a Rule 11 sanctions motion even after a notice of appeal has been filed. But it concluded that the pending appeal was directly connected to the conduct underlying Universitas’s sanctions motion. The Second Circuit’s review could provide insight into whether Grist Mill’s Rule 60(b) motion was proper.

Ruling

The court deferred resolution of Universitas’s pending Rule 11 sanctions motion until the Second Circuit resolves Grist Mill’s appeal. The court directed Universitas to file a status letter within 15 days after the Second Circuit issues its mandate resolving the appeal. The letter must explain what effect, if any, the appellate decision has on the sanctions motion. Judge Laura Taylor Swain did not decide whether sanctions should be imposed.