UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTMIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDATAMPA DIVISION
SUNLUST PICTURES, LLC, )))Plaintiff, )))Civil Action No.8:12-CV-1685-MSS-MAPv. ))
December 4th, 2012
TUAN NGUYEN, )))Defendants, )
DEFENDANT TUAN NGUYEN’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINSTATTORNEY MATTHEW WASINGER
With leave of the court being granted
sua sponte
at the hearing on November 27
th
,2012, the Defendant files this Motion for Sanctions against attorney Matthew Wasingerfor his absence at the hearing scheduled on that date, and states:Scope of Authority to Enter Sanctions for Missing a HearingPursuant to F.R.C.P. Rule 83, a judge may regulate practice in any mannerconsistent with federal law, rules adopted under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2072, and 2075.See F.R.C.P. 83(b) (2011). For his absence at this hearing, whether willful orunintentional, this court has the inherent authority to issue sanctions against Mr.Wasinger, to reprimand him, find him in contempt, and/or to prohibit him from practicingfor a limited time before this court. Woodham v. Amer. Cytoscope Co. of Pelham, 335F.2d 551, 557 fn. 15 (5th Cir. 1964).
Case 8:12-cv-01685-MSS-MAP Document 30 Filed 12/04/12 Page 1 of 9 PageID 138
Brief Analysis of the Activities of Plaintiff’s CounselCounsel for Defendant is a practicing lawyer who is not without error, and hassympathy for his mistaken interpretation of the court order and his motions to withdrawpending in multiple Prenda Law cases. However, the court order presented to Mr.Wasinger clearly stated that the matter on his withdraw would be taken up at the hearingon this case. (D.E. 21)Request for SanctionsDespite the fact that he has previously denied that he was duped (D.E. 26) intoaccepting these cases, Defendant believes that he was at least coaxed into his currentposition by Prenda Law, and that he failed to make a reasonable inquiry upon engaging inrepresentation of “Prenda Law” and by proxy, Prenda Law clients. He also failed toreview orders of this court in relationship to federal cases that he was handling on behalf of his client.Monetary SanctionsCounsel for Defendant expended extra attorney hours by reviewing additionalmaterial for the hearing based upon Mr. Wasinger’s expected appearance. Defendant’sattorney bills at a rate of $250.00 per hour and expended approximately 2 hours of additional hearing preparation devoted to the involvement of Mr. Wasinger, his activitieswith Prenda Law, and the preparation of the documents in this case. Defendants counselhad four hours of drive time to the hearing, and four hours in return. Preparation of thismotion and deciding a course of action, as well as attempts to settle the matter of sanctions has taken the counsel for Defendant 3.6 hours of phone consultations with
Case 8:12-cv-01685-MSS-MAP Document 30 Filed 12/04/12 Page 2 of 9 PageID 139
opposing counsel, preparation, and research. This motion for sanctions took 2+ hours todraft, edit, and finalize.Request of Offer of Non-Monetary SanctionsThroughout representation of the Defendant, counsel has begged answers forsimple questions regarding the involvement of actors of Prenda Law. The questionsasked relate to whether or not he has ever spoken directly with his clients, and thereforewhether he has ever conveyed settlement offers in this case, how he came to be involved,how he was approached on these cases, and how he was instructed to handle matters of discovery, especially those disclosures required under rule F.R.C.P 26(a)(1)(A).There is a very high rate of turnover in Prenda law cases of local counsels in theState of Florida and the various other United States. Some of these matters are withquestionable corporation names such as Ingenuity 13 and AF Holdings, who for allpractical purposes seem to lack any indication of purported principal.Numerous attorneys have been employed in states all over the country, with thissame model of representation provided by Prenda Law in this matter. Some of these“local counsel” attorneys are hired, and Prenda Law handles their paperwork in bothState and Federal courts and likely splits the associated fee. Mr. Torres stated that heanswered an ad for Prenda Law looking for local counsel coverage. Defendant believesthat all these attorneys are victims of Prenda Law and John Steele.Defendant’s ConcessionDefendant would rather see the abusive and deceitful patterns of Prenda Lawterminated than be awarded monetary sanctions. Because this is not within the power of Mr. Wasinger to provide, as his relationship with Prenda Law appears somewhat soured
Case 8:12-cv-01685-MSS-MAP Document 30 Filed 12/04/12 Page 3 of 9 PageID 140
|