The defendants by counterclaim, who were the plaintiffs' lawyers in the main actions, submitted written requests under Rule 2.1.01(6) to have the counterclaims against them dismissed as frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process.
The plaintiff by counterclaim, a lawyer himself, raised various complaints against opposing counsel arising from a complicated real estate transaction.
The court declined to dismiss the counterclaims summarily under Rule 2.1, finding that while the claims might ultimately be defeated by absolute privilege, they were not clearly frivolous on their face and there was no apparent risk of a vexatious response to an ordinary motion to strike.
