Legal Question in Civil Litigation in Indiana
ethics, strategy
I filed a complaint with the EEOC. My ex-supervisor lied repeatedly to the investigator. The lies were about things material to my complaint. While he lied at least 3 times about 7 different issues I can prove 4 of the lies. Since the investigation, I files a lawsuit. He ''adjusted'' one of his lies. He figured out that a simple phone call would prove him a liar. He is trying to cover his you know what. Unfortunately, now I can prove both of those contradictory answers to be lies, in addition to the original lies I can prove. When I say prove, actually it is more self-evident than proof. If he told the truth he would basically admit to my complaint. The ex-employer's attorney is now aware, I had to point out a couple of the items, that my ex-supervisor has lied numerous times, both to the EEOC and on the complaint answer. I haven't disclosed all of the lies to him but I told him it would be exposed in court. Two questions: 1. What obligations does their attorney now have since he knows his client has repeatedly lied?
2. If he believes me that there are more lies, and there are, that will be exposed in front of a judge and jury, how likely is he to take this all the way to trial?
Thanks.
1 Answer from Attorneys
Re: ethics, strategy
The attorneys obligation is set forth in Rule 11 which states as follows:
By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper � whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it � an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;
(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
The attorney is obligated to follow this guideline if he or she does not may be subject to sanctions.
I suggest that you do some legal research for FRDP Rule 11 to determine if there are cases that fit your fact pattern. Good luck
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
