New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

June 6, 2024

Civil RICO Claim Survives Defendant’s Death (fn 24) (issue conceded) — Meaning of “Abuse of Discretion” (First Circuit) — Court Has Discretion to Decline to Substitute a New Party for a Deceased Party — Who Qualifies As A Deceased Party’s Successor or Representative — Arguments Forfeited Below Considered for Plain Error Only on Appeal — 4 Prongs of Plain Error — The 90-Day Substitution Period in Rule 25(a) Begins Upon Service of the Suggestion of Death — Default Judgment Is a Drastic Measure And Should Be Employed Only in an Extreme Situation

Universitas Education, LLC v. Granderson, 98 F.4th 357 (1st Cir. 2024): When Plaintiff Appellee Universitas Education, LLC (“Universitas”) first initiated this lawsuit against Jack E. Robinson, III (“Robinson”) in 2015, it sought damages against him for (among many other things) alleged violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations ( ...
Universitas Education, LLC v. Granderson, 98 F.4th 357 (1st Cir. 2024): When Plaintiff Appellee Universitas Education, LLC (“Universitas”) first initiated this lawsuit against Jack E. Robinson, III (“Robinson”) in 2015, it sought damages against him for (among many other things)…
Continue Reading

FRAP 38 Sanctions Request In Brief Denied Because Separate Motion Required — But Denied Without Prejudice To Filing Separate Motion

Prabhjot Kaur Kang v. W. Governors Univ., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 13295 (9th Cir. June 3, 2024) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* * < ...
Prabhjot Kaur Kang v. W. Governors Univ., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 13295 (9th Cir. June 3, 2024) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3…
Continue Reading

(1) FRAP 38 Sanctions: “Woebegone Contests To Arbitrators’ Awards Are Sanctionable. Anything Less Makes A Mockery Of Arbitration’s Promise To Expedite And Cut The Costs Of Resolving Disputes” (Good Quote) — (2) Arbitration: New York Law and AAA Rules Allow Awards of Attorney’s Fees as Sanctions Even If the Contract Provides That Each Party Is to Bear Its Own Fees

Am. Zurich Ins. Co. v. Sun Holdings, Inc., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 13303 (7th Cir. June 3, 2024): Sun Holdings purchased a workers'-compensation policy from American Zurich Insurance. The policy made American Zurich responsible for paying all approv ...
Am. Zurich Ins. Co. v. Sun Holdings, Inc., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 13303 (7th Cir. June 3, 2024): Sun Holdings purchased a workers’-compensation policy from American Zurich Insurance. The policy made American Zurich responsible for paying all approved claims in…
Continue Reading

(1) RICO: Causation Requires Direct Relation Between Injury and Conduct — May Properly Be Assessed at Pleading Stage — “Civil RICO Is An Unusually Potent Weapon And For That Reason Courts Strive To Flush Out Frivolous Rico Allegations At An Early Stage Of The Litigation” (Good Quote) — (2) Denial of Leave to Amend Usually Reviewed for Abuse of Discretion But De Novo Review Applies If Denial Based on a Legal Interpretation, Such as Futility

*1 Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Plaintiffs Jonathan and Esther Zuhovitzky challenge the district court’s dismissal, pursuant to
*1 Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Plaintiffs Jonathan and Esther Zuhovitzky challenge the district court’s dismissal, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure …
Continue Reading

RICO: Basic Elements of Civil RICO Claim and Pattern Requirement

Gladney v. Consumers Credit Union, 2024 WL 2797914 (11th Cir. May 31, 2024) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Abram Gladney, pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his pro se civil complaint against Consumers Credit Union (“CCU”), with whom Gladney refinanced his car loan, for failure to state a claim. Gladney also appeals the ...
Gladney v. Consumers Credit Union, 2024 WL 2797914 (11th Cir. May 31, 2024) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Abram Gladney, pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his pro se civil complaint against Consumers Credit Union (“CCU”), with whom Gladney refinanced…
Continue Reading

Recent Articles

RICO: (1) Victim vs. Perpetrator Enterprises — (2) § 1962(b): Elements of a Violation — (3) Meaning of “Interest” and “Control” in § 1962(b) — (4) The Defendant in a § 1962(b) Action Need Not Be an Enterprise; The Victim Must Be An Enterprise — (5) Acquisition/Maintenance Injury Required (6) Aiding and Abetting Liability under RICO

Rule 11 Sanctions: Request for Bill of Particulars re Sanctions Proceeding Reviewed for Abuse of Discretion — Court’s Discretion Narrows As Severity of Sanction Increases OR When It Initiates the Sanction Proceeding Itself — Particularly Strict Abuse of Discretion Standard Applied — “Rule 11 Does Not License a District Court to Sanction Any Action by an Attorney or Party That It Disapproves of” (Good Quote) — Failure to Provide Identify Specific Pleading and Detail Specific, Objectionable Conduct within that Pleading Violates Due Process — Failure to Provide Notice That Most Severe Sanction May Be Imposed Violates Due Process — Failure to Provide Notice That “Scarlett Letter Sanction” (Mandatory Circulation of Sanctions Order) Or Other Sanction That Could Leave Indelible Imprint on Career Might Be Imposed Violates Due Process — Notice That Law Firm Might Be Sanctioned Insufficient to Afford Notice to Firm Lawyer and Managing Partner That He Might Be Sanctioned — Refusal to Impose Additional Sanction Until Impact of Other Imposed Penalties (Not Sanctions) Ascertained to See Whether Sanction Needed

Rule 37(c)(1) Sanctions: (1) Exclusion of Expert Testimony Reviewed for Abuse of Discretion Even When It Results in Summary Judgment — (2) Whether Physicians Must File 26(a)(2)(B) Report Depends on Whether They Formed Their Opinions for Litigation Or in the Course of Medical Treatment — (3) Party Seeking to Avoid Exclusion of Its Expert for Noncompliance with Rule 26 Bears Burden of Showing Harmlessness or Substantial Justification — (4) Expert Report Subject to Exclusion If It Is Conclusory and Does Not Meet the Level of Rigor Required by Rule 26(a)(2)(B)

RICO: The Statute Defines Enterprise Broadly, “But That Breadth Is Not Without Limit” (Good Quote) — Enterprise Inadequately Pled Where Plaintiffs Fail to Name the Common Purpose, Explain How the Relationships Among the Defendants Allowed Them to Advance That Purpose, Or Specify the Period of Time Sufficient to Achieve That Purpose — In a Particular Case, the Pattern of Racketeering May Be Sufficient to Infer the Existence of an Association-in-Fact Enterprise, But Pattern Does Not Necessarily Establish Enterprise — A RICO Conspiracy May Exist Regardless of Whether the Substantive RICO Violation Is Consummated, But the Substantive Violation Must Be Adequately Pled

RICO: (1) Claim Accrued When Plaintiff Suffered, and Was Aware of, Her Injury — Overt Retaliation in Her Employment As A Result of Reporting Another Employee’s Sexual Misconduct — Not When a Report Confirming that Misconduct Later Became Public; (2) Inhouse Lawyer’s Conclusion No Sexual Misconduct Occurred Is a Mere Expression of a Legal Conclusion, Not Deception Warranting SOL Reprieve Due to Equitable Tolling or Fraudulent Concealment — Plaintiff Exhibited Lack of Diligence in Failing to Consult Own Counsel or Challenge Inhouse Counsel’s Conclusion; (3) Causation: Plaintiff Must Prove Her Injuries Were Directly Caused by the Predicate Acts — (4) Concealment of Report Commissioned by Employer Directly Harmed Employer (by Exposing It to Liability) and Victims of Sexual Misconduct, and Only Indirectly Harmed Plaintiff Who Suffered Retaliation in Her Employment for Reporting the Misconduct

RICO: Without Injury to Business or Property, Injury Resulting from RICO Violation Is Not Actionable under RICO — Meaning of “Property” in § 1964(c) — Meaning of “Business” in § 1964(c) — Mere “Expectancy Interests” ≠ Business or Property — Loss of NCAA Eligibility = Loss of a Status, Not Loss of Property — Pecuniary Losses (Here, Attorney’s Fees) Flowing from a Non-Cognizable Injury Are Not Recoverably via RICO

RICO: Enterprise Not Sufficiently Distinct from Defendant Where Enterprise Allegedly Consisted of the Defendant Corporation, Corporate Employees, Their Counsel and “Friends”

FRAP 38 Sanctions Should Not Lightly Be Awarded on the Ground That an Incorrect Argument Was Frivolous — “An Appeal Can Be Weak, Indeed Almost Hopeless, Without Being Frivolous” (Good Quote) — There Must Be “No Legitimate Basis for Pursuing the Appeal” (Good Quote)

Severe Emotional Distress and Trauma ≠ RICO Injury — Parents’ Voluntary Financial Support of Adult Daughter Who Was Forced to Sign Over Her Annuity in Violation of RICO Not Proximately Caused by RICO Violation — Injury Is Derivative, Not Direct (Intimation of Different Result if Financial Support Required by Law) — RICO Injury Is Requirement for Statutory Standing (12(b)(6) Issue), Not Constitutional Standing (12(b)(1) Issue)

RICO — Neither Filing a Complaint Nor Issuing a Press Release Constitutes Wire Fraud — Litigation Privilege Is Absolute and Bars All Tort Claims Other Than Malicious Prosecution — Abuse of Process Claim Barred (California Law)

Archives
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.
New York Attorneys JHA handles range the gamut of complex financial and commercial litigation and arbitration, including securities, RICO, corporate and contract disputes, credit default swaps, derivatives, and class, mass, and derivative actions. The firm also represents law firms in major disputes.

New York Office

© 2024 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice