A very serious, very real R11 application can be found in the controversy surrounding Trump’s claim that he can pardon anybody, even himself. The Constitution gives the President this power,
The President…shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. (US Const., Article II, Section 2, Clause 2).
Now this is a very broad grant of power, but is restricted to crimes against the US and not civil cases. However, it is silent as to who can be pardoned, and whether or not it applies to the President. A strict examination, “parsing”, says the President can do whatever he wants to do.
What has Rule 11 have to do with this claim? It could be argued that,
1. It is frivolous;
2. Unsupported by evidence;
3. Presented for an improper purpose;
4. Not warranted by a nonfrivolous extension of the law, or to make new law.
These counter-arguments, based on the overall purpose and intent of the Constitution and its creation of 3 equal branches of government, provides a strong rejection of the unrestricted claims of Presidential pardon power. As I’ve read many times in court opinions, the court rejected frivolous claims as they “would make a mockery of the law.”
Or, as another put it, “would turn the Constitution on its head.”
Read more about court Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11 as applied to HOA litigation.