USCA1 Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

_________________________

No. 97-1343

SPECIALIZED PLATING, INC. AND PETER D. PREVETT,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC., ET AL.,

Defendants, Appellees.

_________________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]

___________________

_________________________

Before

Selya, Boudin and Lynch,

Circuit Judges.
______________

_________________________

Peter D. Prevett on brief pro se.

________________

_________________________

October 14, 1997

_________________________

Per Curiam.
Per Curiam.
__________

Attorney Peter D. Prevett appeals from the

imposition of a sanction in the

court.1

amount of $5,250, payable to the

In a previous unpublished opinion, Specialized Plating,

____________________

Inc. v. Federal Environmental Servs., Inc., No. 97-1343, slip op.

____
__________________________________

(1st Cir. July 22,

1997) (per curiam), we retained

jurisdiction

and remanded for a more detailed explanation of the basis for the

monetary sanction.

In response,

Report dated August 25, 1997.

identified

the

In the

two purposes underlying

district court

filed

Report, the district court

the monetary sanction:

"to

reimburse the taxpayers for the abuse of the judicial system" and

"to

deter Mr.

supplemental

Prevett from

memorandum

further

abuse."

challenging

the

Prevett filed

district

court's

reasoning and findings in various respects.

We do not dwell on the merits other than to say that we

credit the findings

monetary

contained in the Report and

sanction

conduct which the

supra note 1.
_____

is

appropriate to

repetition

district court found to be

of the

unacceptable.

See
___

We turn, then, to the size of the sanction.

Appellate review of the size

for

deter

conclude that a

abuse of

discretion.

In that

of a monetary sanction is

regard, "When

the district

court settles upon a monetary sanction and fixes a dollar amount,

reviewing tribunal should

defer, within broad

limits, to the

____________________

1The district court apparently imposed the sanction pursuant

to Fed.

R.

sanction

Civ. P.

occurred

scheduled bench
court

16(f).
when the

The incident
attorney

trial (without

sanctioned him

as

giving

failed

to

any satisfactory

a condition

dismissal.

of

rise to
appear for
excuse).

vacating the

the

The

ensuing

district

court's

exercise

of

Nevertheless, the court of appeals

`rubber-stamp

the decisions of

review of the appropriateness of

deteriorate

its

informed

discretion.

must be careful not merely to

the district court.'

Appellate

a sanction cannot be allowed to

into a perfunctory ritual."

Navarro-Ayala v. Nunez,
_____________
_____

968 F.2d 1421, 1426 (1st Cir. 1992) (citation omitted).

A monetary penalty

payable to the court is

a suitable

sanction

court's

for a

Rule 16(f)

management of

Realty, 990
______

F.2d 1,

violation that

its docket.

5 (1st Cir.

interferes with

See Jones
___ _____

1993).

the

v. Winnepesaukee
_____________

Still, we

think that

Prevett raises a valid question as to the amount of the impost in

this instance.

In

assessing

the

reasonableness

of

"proportionality is often a proxy for appropriateness."

Ayala, 968 F.2d at 1427.

_____

"the

punishment should

Anderson
________

1990).

In

be

due respect for

Navarro________

such purlieus, it is important that

reasonably

v. Beatrice Foods Co.,

___________________

With

sanction,

900

suited

to

F.2d 388,

the district court's

discretion, we find the imposition of a $5,250

the

crime."

395 (1st

Cir.

considerable

fine in this case

to be

substantially disproportionate and,

therefore, excessive.

We explain briefly.

We

believe

principally from

that

we

must

the standpoint of

evaluate

deterrence.2

the

sanction

It

is settled

____________________

2While
sanction

to

relationship

district
specific

court

non-court

to sanctionable

Riggins Trucking, Inc.,

_______________________
banc), the

may

district court

sometimes
costs

that

misconduct,

757 F.2d

557, 560

here used an

see,
___

tie

bear
e.g.,
____

(3d Cir.

approach to

monetary
a

direct
Eash
____

v.

1985) (en

such costs

that a "monetary sanction aimed at deterrence is appropriate only

when the

amount of the

reasonably required

sanction falls within the

to deter

the abusive

minimum range

behavior."

Navarro________

Ayala, 968 F.2d at 1427; accord In re Kunstler, 914 F.2d 505, 523
_____
______ ______________

(4th Cir. 1990).

Here, given Prevett's representations about the

extent of his law practice, there is

no reason to believe that a

sum somewhat smaller

than $5,250 would not be

deterrent.

As

in

Navarro-Ayala,
_____________

punishment,

but

the

communicated

F.2d at 1428.

sting

of

the

emphatically through a

"[t]he

lash

a fully effective

violation

could

deserved

have

more modest penalty."

been

968

Where,

vehicle for

as here,

monetary

deterrence against the

whole, is excessive

may, of course,

734 (5th Cir.

See id. (citing

___ ___

1989), and Cheek

_____

rather than remanding,

sanction.

as a

We

court to refigure

Coats v. Pierre, 890

_____
______

v. Doe, 828
___

F.2d 728,

F.2d 395, 398

(7th

In this instance, the record on appeal

complete and too

classified as

are not constrained to follow

much judicial

been spent on counsel's regrettable lapse.

properly be

as

backdrop of the record

remand to permit the district

Cir. 1987) (per curiam)).

is reasonably

viewed

in amount, we have a choice of anodynes.

the amount of the sanction, but we

such a course.

sanction,

a case in

time has

Accordingly, this may

which an

appellate court,

ought simply to recast the

Believing, as we do,

already

amount of the

that an amount of $1,000 "stands

____________________

that

we

find problematic.

We

therefore concentrate

district court's alternative ground:

on

the

deterrence.

at the

outer periphery of

Navarro-Ayala,
_____________

968 F.2d

permissible sanctions in

at 1428,

we reduce

this case,"

the amount

of the

sanction from $5,250 to $1,000.

We need go

no further.3

We affirm the imposition of a

monetary sanction payable to the

court, but reduce the amount of

the sanction to $1,000.

Affirmed as modified.
Affirmed as modified.
____________________

No costs.
No costs.
_________

____________________

3Prevett's
"answering

request

for

rescission

of

the

so-called

service" sanction is moot because that requirement is

no longer in effect.