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

Rule 41(d) Costs (Awardable If Plaintiff Who Voluntarily Dismissed Refiles) Only Include Attorney’s Fees If the Underlying Statute Forming the Basis of the Suit Authorizes Them — 3 Way Circuit Split — Argument in Footnote Not Preserved for Appeal

Garza v. Citigroup Inc., 2018 WL 671133 (3d Cir. Feb. 2, 2018): *1 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(d), a district court may order a plaintiff who voluntarily dismisses an action and files a second action against the …
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions — Vexatious Litigant Injunction Barring New Suit Against Defendants Until Sanction Paid — Due Process Satisfied by Order to Show Cause and Opportunity to Be Heard — Hearing Not Required — Meaning of Abuse of Discretion (6th Cir.)

Abe v. Mich. St. Univ. Bd. of Trustees, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 128 (6th Cir. Jan. 3, 2018): ORDER Babashola Abe, a Michigan resident proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's judgment dismissing his civil complaint, purportedly filed pursuant to…
Continue Reading

Dismissal Without Prejudice Appealable If Plaintiff Effectively Out of Fed Court — 41(b) Dismissal Factors (10th Cir.) Not Apt If W/o Prejudice — Informal Minute Order Supports 41(b) Dismissal for Non-Compliance—Limits on Solicitude for Pro Ses

Black v. Larimer Cty., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 90 (10th Cir. Jan. 3, 2018): ORDER AND JUDGMENT* On April 17, 2014, Larimer County, Colorado (the County) hired Melissa Black to perform seasonal work as a restroom custodian in its…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court – Supplemental Jurisdiction: § 1367 Stops the Clock on State Statute of Limitations While State Law Claims Are Pending in Federal Court and for 30 Days after the Federal Claim Is Dismissed

Artis v. District of Columbia, 199 L. Ed. 2d 473 (2018): The Supplemental Jurisdiction statute, 28 U. S. C. §1367, enables federal district courts to entertain claims not otherwise within their adjudicatory authority when those claims “are so related…
Continue Reading

Spoliation: $2.7 Million Compensatory Award in $20,000 Case OK, Even Though Little of Value Found, Where Discovery Reasonable — Upgrading Operating System During Lit. Hold = Intentional Spoliation — Civil Rights Fee Caselaw Inapt

Klipsch Grp., Inc. v. ePRO E-Commerce Ltd., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 1872 (2d Cir. Jan. 25, 2018):   In the course of defending against claims that it sold counterfeit products, defendant-appellant ePRO E-Commerce Limited ("ePRO") engaged in persistent discovery misconduct: …
Continue Reading

All Writs Act: Does Relitigation Exception Allow Federal Courts to Enjoin State Suits Concerning Claims or Issues That Could Have Been Brought in Prior Federal Action Or Only Those Actually Litigated? Circuit Split & a Hint from the S.Ct.

Dakota Med., Inc. v. RehabCare Grp., Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15972 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2018): 6 There is a circuit split over whether the relitigation exception allows federal courts to enjoin state suits concerning any claims and issues …
Continue Reading

Ruling on Merits Not Prerequisite to Award of § 1927 Sanctions — Presence of Some Reasonable Allegations Doesn’t Excuse Meritless Claims — 12(b)(6) Dismissal Is a Ruling on the Merits

Lefande v. Mische-Hoeges, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 2751 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 1, 2018): These consolidated appeals were considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties.…
Continue Reading
Previous113114115116117118119Next

Recent Articles

FRAP 38 and Pro Se Litigants — Observations, Not Sanctions, For Non-Existent Quotations

Rule 37(c)(1) Exclusion Sanction: Under R&R Sails, A Discovery Sanction Is Not Claim Dispositive Just Because It Makes It “Much More Difficult, Perhaps Almost Impossible” For A Party To Proceed With Its Claim Or Argument — The Sanction Must Be Fatal — Only Then Is Proof of Willfulness, Fault Or Bad Faith Required — To The Extent The Imposition Of Sanctions Turns On The Resolution Of An Issue Of Law, Review Is De Novo

Supreme Court: Party Moving to Set Aside Void Judgment Under Rule 60(b)(4) Must Do So Within A Reasonable Time Per Rule 60(c)(1)

Supreme Court: Erie/Rule 8/Rule 11: Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Conflicts with and Overrides Delaware’s Affidavit of Merit in Medical Malpractice Actions — A Valid Rule of Civil Procedure Displaces Contrary State Law Even If The State Law Is Substantive — Rule 11’s Proviso That “[U]nless A Rule Or Statute Specifical States Otherwise, A Pleading Need Not Be Verified Or Accompanied By An Affidavit” Refers to Rules Or Statutes Requiring Represented Parties To Verify Pleading Or Sign Affidavits — It Has Nothing To Do With Affidavits From Third Parties — Good Quote: Drawing A Negative Inference from Text Is Sometimes the Best Way To Understand It

RICO Statute of Limitations — Storm Warnings, Not Thunder and Lightning (Good Quote)

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 Property 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?

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

© 2026 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice