![12/18/92 Brian M. Barnard V. Toni M. Sutliff And](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![12/18/92 Brian M. Barnard V. Toni M. Sutliff And](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
12/18/92 Brian M. Barnard V. Toni M. Sutliff And
-
- $9.00
-
- $9.00
Descripción editorial
Brian M. Barnard appeals from a district court order and judgment finding that he violated rule 11 of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and imposing a sanction of $4,381. The Third District Court found that Barnard had failed to research its jurisdiction properly before filing a suit seeking to enjoin a bar disciplinary proceeding against him. Barnard contends that he did not violate rule 11 because he made a reasonable inquiry into the status of the law and his research revealed that Utah law is unclear on the jurisdictional question. Because we find that the district court's legal bases for imposing the sanction are in error, we vacate its order and remand.