attorneys’ fees. Good faith negotiations do not always achieve a resolution satisfactory to all parties, and we do not criticize suits based on fee claims that cannot be resolved through mediation efforts. Appeal of the district court’s fee determination should be taken only where the district court allegedly has misapplied the applicable law. Appeals contending that the district court abused its discretion in determining the amount awarded ordinarily do not require oral argument and will be decided without argument by a three-judge screening panel. If the court holds an appeal is frivolous and not brought in good faith, the court may properly exercise sanctions relating to costs and attorneys’ fees. Cf. Eastway Construction Corp. v. City of New York, 762 F.2d 243, 253-54 (2d Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis in original). In the present case we
holding that an order imposing sanctions against an attorney for one of the parties in a pending case is final and therefore immediately appealable by the attorney holding the law is clear that an attorney or insurance companys misconduct is imputable to the client holding that under florida law for the purposes of collateral estoppel an attorney is in privity with his or her client in a previous suit when the opposing party in that action brings a subsequent suit against the attorney based in the same facts holding fedrcivp 11 requires sanctions against an attorney andor his client when it appears that a pleading has been interposed for any improper purpose or where after reasonable inquiry a competent attorney could not form a reasonable belief that the pleading is well grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension modification or reversal of existing law holding that there are many transactions between attorney and client that have no element of confidence in them of which  the attorney is competent to testify