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

Joseph Hage Aaronson

Contempt Sanction: Reading Only PACER Entry & Not Order = Bad Faith — Magistrate Judge Lacks Power to Adjudicate Contempt — Summary Adjudication OK for Violation in Court’s Presence (Failure to Have Client Present, As Ordered) — $2,500 Penalty

Deutsch v. Annis Enters., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 3028 (5th Cir. Feb. 8, 2018): PER CURIAM: This is a companion case to Deutsch v. Travis County Shoe Hospital, Inc., No. 16-51431, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 2647 (5th Cir. …
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege: Simply Filing Suit to Which Privileged Info Is Relevant Doesn’t Effect Waiver — Mere Relevance Is Never Enough — Excellent Collection of Waiver Cases with Factual and Legal Analysis — Hearn Overruled by Swidler

In re Iltron, Inc., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 4136 (5th Cir. Feb. 21, 2018): This mandamus petition calls on us to correct a significant misapplication of attorney-client privilege law. The underlying lawsuit springs from a disputed corporate merger. Plaintiff-Petitioner Itron …
Continue Reading

28 U.S.C. § 1782: Does a Magistrate Judge Have Jurisdiction to Issue a Final Order to Compel Discovery or May the MJ Issue Only a Report & Recommendation? — Circuit Split

Ex Parte Application of Godfrey, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29794 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 22, 2018):   REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA AND PETITIONERS' MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENA Respondent Stephen P. Lynch moves to quash the…
Continue Reading

No § 1927 Sanctions for Conduct in Other Court (Here, Dist. Ct. on App.) — Rule 11 Inapt on Appeal — No Rule 38 Sanctions for Meritless But Not Frivolous Appeal — Rule 15(a) vs. (d): Is Leave to Supplement As Freely Granted as to Amend?

Connor v. Castro, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 4511 (5th Cir. Feb. 23, 2018): PER CURIAM:* * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the…
Continue Reading

Rule 408 Yields (Mostly) to Court’s Ongoing Supervision over Injunction — Rule 407 Inapt If Feasibility Denied — Law of the Case & Mandate Rule Bar Reexamination by Dist. or App. Ct. of Issue Decided on Prior Appeal — Exceptions

Ball v. LeBlanci, 881 F.3d 346, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 2402, 2018 WL 632503 (5th Cir. 2018): Elzie Ball, Nathaniel Code, and James Magee are death row inmates in the Louisiana State Penitentiary ("LSP") and are housed in cells without …
Continue Reading

Rule 11—Where Detailed SJ Opinion Puts Plaintiff on Notice of Legal Deficiency of Claim, Fact Leave to Appeal Granted Doesn’t Preclude Sanctions for Filing Amended Complaint without Addressing Deficiency — FRAP 38 Sanctions for Same on Appeal

Debeikes v. Hawaiian Airlines, Inc., 2018 WL 991377 (9th Cir. Feb. 21, 2018): MEMORANDUM** *1 Matthew J. Debeikes appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment and challenges its denial of his request to reopen discovery. He also,…
Continue Reading
Previous111112113114115116117Next

Recent Articles

Rule 37 Discovery Sanctions: Ninth Circuit’s Five-Factor Test for Gauging Appropriateness of Dismissal — The Limited Utility of Rule 12(f) Motions to Strike

RICO: Employer Suffered Harm to Business or Propoerty When Kickbacks Paid to Employees in Real Estate Transactions Done for Employer — Expert Testimony Sufficient to Prove Harm — Proof That Employer Paid Above-Market Prices Not Essential — Non-Disclosure of Certain Damages in Initial Disclosures Cured by Expert Report, Which Also Rendered Initial Non-Disclosure Harmless

Spoliation: Dismissal Under Rule 37(e)(2) and Monetary Sanctions Under Rule 37(e)(1), Implicitly Reading The “Or” Between 37(e)(1) and 37(e)(2) As Conjunctive, Not Disjunctive — Clear Error Standard of Review for District Court’s Intent (= Bad Faith) Finding under 37(e)(2)(C) — Additional Monetary Sanctions Imposed on Claimants under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and Rule 37(a)(5) — No Right to Jury Determination of Intent under Rule 37(e)(2) — “Substantially Justified” in Rule 37(a)(5) Has Same Meaning As In Equal Access to Justice Act and Thus Rule 11 — Meaning of “Unreasonable and Vexatious” in 7th Circuit

Inherent Power Sanction of Dismissal — Preponderance of the Evidence Burden of Proof, Not Clear and Convincing Evidence (7th Circuit)

§ 1927 Sanctions — Must A Lawyer Who Unreasonably and Vexatiously Multiplies Federal Court Proceedings Be Acting “As An Attorney” When Committing the Misconduct To Be Subject to Sanction under § 1927?

Rule 37 Sanctions — Unfamiliarity With Litigation Process Does Not Excuse Intentional Disregard of Court Order — Also Affirming Rule 26(g) Sanctions on Clients and Counsel for False Representations That All Responsive Documents Had Been Produced

Supreme Court: Notice of Appeal Filed After The Original Deadline But Before Reopening by The District Court Is Timely — It Relates Forward to The Date of The Order Making The Appeal Possible — Second Notice of Appeal After Reopening Unnecessary

Rule 37 Default Judgment: Second Circuit’s Four-Factor Test for Imposing Defaults and Three-Factor Test for Lifting Them

Rule 37 Default Judgment — Tenth Circuit Multifactor Test Is Not Exhaustive But a Non-Exclusive List of “Sometimes-Helpful Criteria Or Guide Posts”— Appeal from Preliminary Injunction Mooted by Entry of Permanent Injunction — Difficulty in Collecting Damages Award May Equal Irreparable Injury — A Monetary Award For Past Conduct Does Not Preclude A Permanent Injunction Against Similar Wrongful Conduct Likely To Occur In The Future

RICO: Cover-Up Within Limitations Period of Untimely RICO Violation “Was Merely A Continuation” Of The Original Injury And Could Not Be Used “As A ‘Bootstrap’ To Salvage [The] Time-Barred Claims–Declining to Apply Pinkerton Doctrine to Civil RICO Claims

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

© 2025 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice