Earlier this week, a court in the Southern District of Texas sent out a not so gentle reminder that lying to the court is never a good idea. In Tesco Corp. v. Weatherford Int’l, Inc et al., Tesco’s counsel tried to salvage its case by making blatantly false misrepresentations to the court after surprising trial testimony by the patent inventor threatened to end the case. Those misrepresentations proved temporarily successful when the jury rendered a verdict that some of the patent’s claims were valid. However, that victory was short-lived. During post-trial discovery, the misrepresentations were uncovered and the court, disappointed in Tesco’s counsel’s “deliberate and advantage-seeking untruthful conduct,” used its inherent sanctioning powers to dismiss Tesco’s case with prejudice. Unfortunately for Tesco—and Tesco’s counsel—the Court was not done. The court also stated that it would entertain motions for attorney’s fees based on its ruling—attorney’s fees that may be paid by Tesco’s counsel alone. 

Tesco Corp. v. Weatherford Int’l, Inc., et al., No. 4:08-cv-02531 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 25, 2014) (Ellison, J.).