[ad_1]
Practice Technology
Blaming Word setting for overlong briefs is ‘somewhat hard to believe,’ federal judge says as she tosses footnotes
A setting in Microsoft Word is to blame for a failure to include footnotes in word counts for briefs filed on behalf of online casino provider High 5 Games, its lawyers told a federal judge in fighting a bid for sanctions. (Screenshot from Holland & Hart’s March 4 declaration)
A setting in Microsoft Word is to blame for a failure to include footnotes in word counts for briefs filed on behalf of online casino provider High 5 Games, its lawyers told a federal judge in fighting a bid for sanctions.
U.S. District Judge Tiffany M. Cartwright of the Western District of Washington noted the argument as she denied a bid for monetary sanctions for two overlong briefs in a March 28 order. Cartwright, an appointee of President Joe Biden, opted instead to exclude any text in footnotes in the two briefs regarding summary judgment in the case.
Law360 has the story.
Holland & Hart partner Jessica Smith said in a March 4 declaration she was unaware that the Microsoft Word settings had deselected the option to include footnotes in the final word count of the document. The briefs were within word limits allowed by local rules when the footnotes were excluded.
High 5 Games had certified that one of its briefs contained 8,400 words when it actually contained more than 9,000. It certified that another brief had 4,199 words, when it actually contained more than 4,300 words.
“This was an innocent error on my part and the part of my team,” Smith said in the declaration.
The plaintiff’s motion for sanctions was “premised on the unsupported (and untrue) assumption that High 5’s counsel intentionally misrepresented the length of two of its briefs in an effort to get around the word limit,” lawyers for High 5 Games wrote in a March 4 response to the sanctions motion. “The truth is far less nefarious.”
Cartwright expressed some skepticism, saying “the explanation that this mistake occurred without anyone’s knowledge is somewhat hard to believe given the experience and sophistication of counsel for High 5 Games.”
Cartwright said there was no need to resolve the credibility issue, however, because High 5 Games agreed that she could refuse to consider the footnotes, making sanctions unnecessary.
Smith did not immediately respond to the ABA Journal’s request for comment made via email and voicemail.
The class action lawsuit against High 5 Games alleges that players begin playing online High 5 Games with promises of free chips, only to be charged for a new batch when the initial chips run out. High 5 Games is represented by Carney Badley Spellman and by Holland & Hart.
[ad_2]
