Roethlisberger's attorneys to seek sanctions
Attorneys for Ben Roethlisberger have notified the attorney for the woman who claims she was sexually assaulted by the Steelers quarterback that they intend to seek sanctions against him for the "frivolous" lawsuit filed against the millionaire football player.
The attorneys notified Reno attorney Calvin Dunlap on Tuesday that he has 21 days to rectify what they call factual errors in the lawsuit before they seek sanctions against him in the Second Judicial District Court of Nevada where the suit was filed.
Dunlap is representing the Nevada resort worker who claims that Roethlisberger sexually assaulted her on July 11, 2008, at Harrah's Lake Tahoe Hotel and Casino, where she worked as a VIP concierge and he was attending a celebrity golf tournament.
Roethlisberger, 27, has denied assaulting the 31-year-old woman who has never gone to police. The Tribune-Review does not name alleged victims of sexual assault.
"Roethlisberger respectfully requests that the fabricators of a scheme masquerading as a lawsuit, designed to harass and embarrass him ... be subject to Rule 11 sanctions," the proposed motion states. "(Roethlisberger) hopes the sanctions will shock (the woman's) counsel back to reality ..."
The Internet Lectric Law Library states: "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 provides that a district court may sanction attorneys or parties who submit pleadings for an improper purpose or that contain frivolous arguments or arguments that have no evidentiary support."
Dunlap, who could not be reached for comment last night, previously filed court documents accusing Roethlisberger's attorneys of trying to "bully" the woman into dropping her civil suit and for suggesting they might countersue her, a move he said "borders on extortion."
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.