PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 7, 1995
Frivolous Lawsuit Prevention Act of 1995 - Amends the Federal judicial code to require a court that enters a final judgment in any civil action against a party litigant on the basis of a default, motion to dismiss, motion for summary judgment, or trial on the merits to determine (upon motion by the prevailing party) whether: (1) the complaint or motion is being presented for any improper purpose; (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions in the complaint or motion, taken as a whole, are unwarranted by existing law or by a good faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law; (3) the allegations and other factual contentions, taken as a whole, lack any factual support or would be likely to lack any factual support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; or (4) the denials of factual contentions are unwarranted in light of the evidence or are not reasonably based on a lack of information or belief. Directs the court, if it determines that the losing party has violated such provision, to impose an appropriate sanction against the attorney for the losing party, which may include an order to pay the prevailing party reasonable fees and other expenses incurred. Requires that such determination be made on the basis of the record in the civil action for which fees and other expenses are sought, but the burden of persuasion shall be on the prevailing party. Requires the court to impose an appropriate sanction against the losing party, which may include an order to pay fees and expenses, if the court determines that such party was principally responsible for the frivolous actions. Authorizes the court to reduce the amount to be awarded or deny an award to the extent that the prevailing party during the course of the proceedings engaged in conduct that unduly and unreasonably protracted the final resolution of the matter in controversy. Sets forth procedures for applying for fees and other expenses.
People & committees
Sen. Bryan, Richard H. [D-NV] · D–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5547)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.712 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.712 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.712 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.712 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.