[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 193 (Wednesday, December 6, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S18106]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT

 Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I was wondering if my friend and 
colleague from Connecticut, Senator Dodd, would yield for a question?
  Mr. DODD. I would be glad to respond to a question from the Senator 
from New Mexico.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I thank the Senator from Connecticut and would ask him 
if it is his understanding that Section 101(3)(A) relating to sanctions 
for filing frivolous pleadings is intended to apply the most serious 
sanction of attorneys' fees and costs for the entire action only to a 
complaint that substantially violates Rule 11(b)?
  Mr. DODD. The Senator from New Mexico is correct that the award of 
attorneys' fees for the entire action will only be imposed upon a 
finding that the complaint substantially violates Rule 11(b).
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Is it therefore correct to say that for all other 
pleadings or motions, whether filed by the plaintiff or defendant, that 
violate Rule 11(b) the sanction would be an award of attorneys' fees 
for the costs associated with that particular pleading or motion only?
  Mr. DODD. The Senator from New Mexico is correct. An award of 
attorneys' fees for all other pleadings or motions except for the 
complaint, whether filed by the plaintiff or defendant, would be only 
for the costs associated with that pleading or motion.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I thank the Senator from Connecticut and have just one 
more question. Is it the intent of H.R. 1058 that sanctions for the 
cost of the entire action would apply if the complaint substantially or 
seriously violates Rule 11(b)?
  Mr. DODD. The Senator from New Mexico is correct.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I thank my friend and colleague from 
Connecticut.

                          ____________________