Here are the materials in Miccosukee Tribe v. Cypress (S.D. Fla.):

38 Defendants Notice of Filing Motion for Sanctions

380 Lewis Tein Trial Brief re Rule 11 Motion

394 Lehtinen Supp Brief

395 Lewis Tein Supp Brief

396 Miccosukee Brief

419 DCT Order

An excerpt:

For the aforementioned reasons, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUGDED that Defendant Lewis Tein’s Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions and Defendant Dexter Lehtinen’s Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, Counsel Bernardo Roman, Esq., and the Law Offices of Bernardo Roman III are SANCTIONED in the amount of $975,750.00 owing to Lewis Tein and in the amount of $95,640.00 owing to Dexter Lehtinen, which represent the attorney’s fees and costs incurred in this matter, including those accrued for bringing and [50]  prosecuting the sanctions motions. See Norelus v. Denny’s, Inc., 628 F.3d 1270, 1298 (11th Cir. 2010) (“[A] district court may include costs arising from the sanctions proceedings in the sanctions award.”); Mike Ousley Prods., Inc. v. WJBF-TV, 952 F.2d 380, 383-84 (11th Cir. 1992) (“This Court has clearly held that a party can collect the expense of pursuing a Rule 11 claim.”).

I recognize the monetary sanctions imposed are sizable. However, considering that upon a finding that a party filed a pleading that has no reasonable factual basis, which unreasonably and vexatiously multiplied the proceeding, an appropriate sanction may be the compensation of attorney’s fees incurred in combating the wrongful conduct. Here, the wrongful conduct is the filing of the complaints with no reasonable factual basis to support their allegations. Following a review of the Lewis Tein’s Sealed Statement of Attorney’s Fees (ECF No. 400, SEALED) and Defendant Lehtinen’s Filing of Legal Fees and Expenses Pursuant to Court Order (ECF No. 404, SEALED), it is difficult to parse out — given the sweeping nature of the Tribe’s allegations, i.e. Defendants Lewis Tein created their law firm “for the main purpose of advancing and perfecting the plundering of the Miccosukee Tribe,” Defendants Lewis Tein devised a money laundering/kickback scheme whereby Defendants [51]  Lewis Tein “would charge exorbitant fees for fictitious, unnecessary, inflated, substandard and exaggerated legal work to funnel a part thereof to Defendant Cypress,” and Defendant Lehtinen “through a pattern of criminal activity. . .maintained control of the affairs of the [Tribe] . . . resulting in a loss of millions of dollars” — which, if any, of the legal fees incurred were not warranted by the allegations.

Materials in Miccosukee’s failed effort to disqualify the judge are here.

Materials on the underlying merits of the claim are here and here.