JONES v. FISHER LAW GROUP, PLLC, (D.Md. 2004)

ROGER TITUS, District Judge

Upon consideration of Defendants' Motion To Dismiss, Or In The Alternative, Motion For Summary Judgment and the opposition thereto, Plaintiffs' Motion For Judgment By Estoppel and the opposition thereto and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is this 30th day of August, 2004, by the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,

ORDERED, that Defendants' Motion To Dismiss, Or In The Alternative, Motion For Summary Judgment [Paper no. 9] is hereby GRANTED; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, that Plaintiffs' Motion For Judgment By Estoppel [Paper no. 10] is hereby DENIED; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, that judgment for costs is entered in favor of all Defendants; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, that the Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, that the Plaintiffs are hereby notified that the Court is contemplating the imposition of sanctions against them under the provisions of Rule 11(c)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and that they are hereby directed to show cause why sanctions should not be entered against them for the following specific conduct by them in this Court:

A. The filing of a complaint for the improper purpose of harassing attorneys who conducted lawful foreclosure proceedings against property owned by them;

B. Asserting claims in their complaint that are not warranted by existing law;

C. Making allegations and other factual contentions in their complaint without any evidentiary support; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED, that the Plaintiffs shall file with the Clerk of this Court their response showing cause why sanctions should not be entered against them on or before the 1st day of October, 2004.