Also known as: meritorious claim · meritorious contention · meritorious claims · Rule 11 · frivolous claims
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A principle requiring that every claim, defense, or legal contention presented to a court rest on a reasonable basis in law and fact rather than on frivolity or speculation. The principle demands that counsel conduct a reasonable inquiry before filing and that contentions either possess evidentiary support or be identified as likely to gain support through discovery. Violations expose counsel, the firm, and the client to sanctions designed to deter repetition.
Marcus Mitchell's attorney filed a complaint alleging that Meridian Motors underreported royalties by exactly fifty percent. The attorney relied only on social-media posts and an ex-employee's vague remark. After notice, the court found the numerical figure lacked reasonable evidentiary support and imposed monetary sanctions on the attorney and firm under the rule governing certifications.
Michael Miller's counsel filed a document styled as a motion to transfer that attached only one complaint and omitted a short statement of removal grounds. The federal court treated the filing as an attempted notice of removal and granted remand because the document failed to satisfy the signature and content requirements that incorporate the duty to present only meritorious contentions.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Madison Meyers sued Mirage Hotels alleging both concrete wage violations and speculative industrial-espionage claims. At the pretrial conference the judge directed counsel to drop the espionage allegations after determining they rested on conjecture rather than any factual grounding, thereby narrowing the issues for trial.
The standard is objective and requires a reasonable prefiling inquiry into both law and fact. A contention is frivolous when it lacks any plausible legal or factual basis and is not presented as a good-faith argument for extending or modifying existing law.
Supporting sources
Yes, provided the lawyer identifies the contention as one that will likely gain support after reasonable investigation and the prefiling inquiry itself was reasonable under the circumstances.
Supporting sources
Yes. A notice of removal must be signed in accordance with Rule 11 and must contain a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal, thereby incorporating the duty to advance only meritorious contentions.
The court may use the conference to formulate and simplify issues and to eliminate frivolous claims or defenses that lack legal or factual footing, thereby focusing the litigation on triable matters.