Greg Joseph

Offensive (Nonmutual) Collateral Estoppel: 4 Factors — Identicality = Same Issues, Not Claims — Necessity Met If Finding Essential to Remedy, Even If Not Jmt — Legal Issues Reviewed De Novo, Fairness for Abuse of Discretion

Bifolck v. Philip Morris United States, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 25023 (2d Cir. Aug. 22, 2019): Vincent Bifolck, individually and as executor of the estate of his deceased wife Jeanette Bifolck, appeals from a judgment of the United States District…

RICO: Whether a Pattern Exists (Predicates + Relationship + Threat of Continuing Activity) Is a Jury Question — Mailing Need Only Be Incident to Fraud, Not Fraudulent — Limited Scope of 9(b) Particularity

Sorensen v. Polukoff, 2019 WL 3819629 (10th Cir. Aug. 15, 2019) (Unpublished): 1 Sherman Sorensen, M.D., appeals the dismissal of his claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. § 1962. The district …

Appeals: In Bankruptcy Appeal, Circuit Sits As Second Court of Review & Independently Examines Factual & Legal Determinations of Bankruptcy Court, Using Same Standards As District Court

In re Crawford, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 24570 (11th Cir. Aug. 19, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Brett Elam appeals portions of the bankruptcy court's order sanctioning him for misconduct in the Chapter 11 proceeding below. As debtor's counsel, Elam sought …

Rule 45 (Or Inherent Power) Sanctions: Fees for Trial Subpoena End Run Around Discovery Deadline — Sub Has Standing to Move to Quash for Parent — Due Process: Rule 45 Puts Counsel on Notice of Its Terms — FRAP 38 Fees for Post-Hoc Rationalizations

Progresive Emu Inc. v. Nutrition & Fitness Inc., 2019 WL 3798494 (11th Cir. Aug. 13, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: *1 This appeal arises from a breach-of-contract dispute between Plaintiff Progressive Emu Inc.,1 a producer and supplier of emu oil,…

Sanctions: Omission Must Be Material before Dismissal May Be Apt — Materiality Defined — State of Mind Critical (Contract, Tort Examples)

Greyer v. Ill. Dep’t of Corrections, 2019 WL 3798212 (7th Cir. Aug. 13, 2019): *1 One of Congress’s expressed goals when it passed the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) was to rein in the flood of prisoner litigation—all too often…

Experts — Legal Malpractice Expert Who Describes Only How S/he Does Same Task for Same Client Fails to Establish What Defendant Should Have Done — Opinion Properly Excluded under 37(c)(1) as Overly Broad, Subjective, Non-Compliant with 26(a)

EQT Prod. Co. v. Phillips, 767 Fed. Appx. 626 (6th Cir. Mar. 29, 2019): This legal malpractice case arises from title opinions that attorney Dale Phillips ("Phillips") provided to EQT Production Company ("EQT") regarding EQT's rights and ownership in certain …

Sanctions Issue Certified to 2d Cir. — May a Bankruptcy Court Order “Punitive Sanctions” under Its Inherent Power, § 105(a) or for Violation of Rule 3002.1(i)? — [May Any Court Issue Punitive Sanctions after Goodyear v. Haeger?]

In re Gravel, 2019 Bankr. LEXIS 2576 (Bankr. D. Vt. Aug. 12, 2019): MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Certifying Decision for Direct Appeal Under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(2) The chapter 13 trustee has filed a motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(2)(A)…

Rule 11—No Sanctions for “Aggressive Lit. Strategy with Colorable (If Strained) Basis,” “Understandable” “Mix-Up” — “It Is One Thing to Lose … Another to Urge Something [Sufficiently] Ill-Founded” (Good Quotes)

MAO-MSO Recovery II, LLC v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 24355 (7th Cir. Aug. 15, 2019): When all the dust is cleared away, this case is relatively straightforward: we must review a dismissal for lack…

Inherent Power Sanctions for Violation of Court Order — Orders Must Be Complied with Until Undone — Contempt Option If Party Has No Recourse to Permit Prompt Appeal Because Violation Cannot Be Undone

MacNaughton v. Harmelech, 2019 WL 3451275 (7th Cir. July 31, 2019): *1 The complex background of these consolidated appeals burrows through over a decade of litigation. Russian Media Group sued Ishaihu Harmelech and his company (“Harmelech Defendants”) in 2006. Attorney …

Arbitration — Choice of Law, Like Arb., Clause, Invokable Only by Party with Standing to Enforce Contract — Collection Agent Can’t Enforce Arb Clause between Bank & Customer as 3d Party Beneficiary, Agent or Via Equitable Estoppel

Orn v. Alltran Fin., L.P., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20744 (3d Cir. July 12, 2019) (unpublished): Alltran Financial, a debt collector, appeals the District Court's denial of its motion to compel arbitration of Diane Orn's suit under the Fair Debt …

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Offensive (Nonmutual) Collateral Estoppel: 4 Factors — Identicality = Same Issues, Not Claims — Necessity Met If Finding Essential to Remedy, Even If Not Jmt — Legal Issues Reviewed De Novo, Fairness for Abuse of Discretion

RICO: Whether a Pattern Exists (Predicates + Relationship + Threat of Continuing Activity) Is a Jury Question — Mailing Need Only Be Incident to Fraud, Not Fraudulent — Limited Scope of 9(b) Particularity

Appeals: In Bankruptcy Appeal, Circuit Sits As Second Court of Review & Independently Examines Factual & Legal Determinations of Bankruptcy Court, Using Same Standards As District Court

Rule 45 (Or Inherent Power) Sanctions: Fees for Trial Subpoena End Run Around Discovery Deadline — Sub Has Standing to Move to Quash for Parent — Due Process: Rule 45 Puts Counsel on Notice of Its Terms — FRAP 38 Fees for Post-Hoc Rationalizations

Sanctions: Omission Must Be Material before Dismissal May Be Apt — Materiality Defined — State of Mind Critical (Contract, Tort Examples)

Experts — Legal Malpractice Expert Who Describes Only How S/he Does Same Task for Same Client Fails to Establish What Defendant Should Have Done — Opinion Properly Excluded under 37(c)(1) as Overly Broad, Subjective, Non-Compliant with 26(a)

Sanctions Issue Certified to 2d Cir. — May a Bankruptcy Court Order “Punitive Sanctions” under Its Inherent Power, § 105(a) or for Violation of Rule 3002.1(i)? — [May Any Court Issue Punitive Sanctions after Goodyear v. Haeger?]

Rule 11—No Sanctions for “Aggressive Lit. Strategy with Colorable (If Strained) Basis,” “Understandable” “Mix-Up” — “It Is One Thing to Lose … Another to Urge Something [Sufficiently] Ill-Founded” (Good Quotes)

Inherent Power Sanctions for Violation of Court Order — Orders Must Be Complied with Until Undone — Contempt Option If Party Has No Recourse to Permit Prompt Appeal Because Violation Cannot Be Undone

Arbitration — Choice of Law, Like Arb., Clause, Invokable Only by Party with Standing to Enforce Contract — Collection Agent Can’t Enforce Arb Clause between Bank & Customer as 3d Party Beneficiary, Agent or Via Equitable Estoppel

Recent Articles

Rule 37(d) Sanctions — For Failure to Serve Answers, Objections, Or Written Response to Discovery Requests — Are Not Limited to Intentional Misconduct; Even Innocent Mistakes May Be Covered

Sanctions: (1) Rule 11 Does Not Apply to Litigation Papers Initially Filed in State Court — Only Reaffirmance in Federal Court Post-Removal Is Subject to Sanction — (2) “The Fact That A Legal Theory Is A Long-Shot Does Not Necessarily Mean It Is Sanctionable” (Good Quote)

Supreme Court: Relief under Rule 60(b)(6) Requires Extraordinary Circumstances Even If It Is Invoked to Allow Amendment of The Complaint–Rule 15’s Liberal Approach to Amendment Does Not Change That (Reversing Second Circuit)

FRAP 38 Sanctions — Eleventh Circuit Generally Does Not Impose FRAP 38 Sanctions on Pro Se Litigants, But May Do So If They Have Persisted Despite Judicial Warnings of Frivolousness

Inherent Power Sanctions: No Dismissal with Prejudice If Lesser Sanctions Will Suffice — The Liberal Pleading Standard of Swierkiewicz “Is Still Good Law”

Statements in Briefs As Judicial Admissions

Supreme Court: TRO As Appealable Order — And District Court Inaction As Tantamount to Refusing An Injunction And Thus Appealable

“Slow-Playing Discovery” in Response to Court Order, Prejudicing Opponent, Violates Rule 37(b)(2)(A)

Archives

New York Office