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

RICO: Non-Fraud Predicates Require Specific Factual Allegations; Hard Bargaining vs. Extortion — Rule 11 Sanctions: Complaint a “Quagmire of Wordy & Repetitious Verbiage” (Good Quote) — Court Must State Basis for Attorney’s Fees Award

Cervantes Orchards & Vineyards, LLC v. Deere & Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 25413 (9th Cir. Dec. 15, 2017): Cervantes Orchards and Vineyards, along with Cervantes Nurseries, Cervantes Packing & Storage, Manchego Real, Jose G. Cervantes, and Cynthia C. Cervantes,…
Continue Reading

Sixth Circuit Appears to Erroneously Affirm § 1927 Sanctions Imposed on Non-Attorney Pro Se Whose Conduct Could Have Been Sanctioned under Rule 11 or the Inherent Power

In re: Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 25352 (6th Cir. Dec. 14, 2017) (unpublished): ORDER Christopher Andrews, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's judgment imposing sanctions against him (No. 17-3361) and its order denying his motion …
Continue Reading

Hearsay Statements of Joint Venturers Admissible for Their Truth under Co-Conspirator Exception (Rule 801(d)(2)(E)) If Proponent Proves by Independent, Non-Hearsay Evidence (i) Existence of Joint Venture and (ii) That Statement Was in Furtherance of It

Commonwealth v. Holley, 2017 Mass. LEXIS 889 (Mass. Dec. 14, 2017): On the morning of October 17, 2012, Alfonso Rivas was in his apartment building anticipating a sale of marijuana to Reginald Holley when Rivas was fatally shot in the…
Continue Reading

Discovery of Income Tax Returns (2-Part Test) — Financial Information Relevant to a Determination of Punitive Damages: Discoverable before Trial? (Case Law Split)

Marsteller v. Butterfield 8 Stamford LLC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195347  (D. Conn. Nov. 28, 2017): Plaintiff Lauren E. Marsteller ("plaintiff") has filed a motion seeking to compel defendants Butterfield 8 Stamford LLC, Public House Investments LLC, Lolas Stamford…
Continue Reading

Email Isn’t Business Record unless Declarant’s Statement Qualifies as Business Record — All Elements of 803(6), Including Regularity, Must Be Satisfied — Forwarding Email May/May Not = Adoptive Admission — Double Hearsay Issues

In re: Oil Spill by the Oil Rig "Deepwater Horizon", 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3406, 87 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 492, 2012 WL 37373 (E.D. La. Jan. 11, 2012): Before the Court are letter briefs from the PSC (Rec.…
Continue Reading

Facebook Admissibility: Third Parties’ Comments on Witness’s Page Not Hearsay When Offered to Prove the Fact That the Subject Matter Was Being Discussed and Not for the Truth of the Comments

State v. Krause, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 4281 (Ohio Ct. App. Sept. 29, 2017):  [*P1]  Appellant, Richard A. Krause, appeals from the June 9, 2016 sentencing entry of the Willoughby Municipal Court. For the following reasons, the judgment of the…
Continue Reading

Rule 37(c)(1) Sanctions: Exclusion of Damages Evidence for Willful Failure to Include Computation in 26(a)(1) Disclosure OK Where Lesser Sanctions No Longer Available — Appeals: Failure to Brief Issue ID’ed in Brief as Presented for Review Waives It

Silver State Broad., LLC v. Bergner, 2017 WL 6047537 (9th Cir. Dec. 7, 2017): *1 Plaintiffs Silver State Broadcasting, LLC, Royce International Broadcasting Corporation, and Golden State Broadcasting, LLC (collectively, “the Broadcasters”) appeal from the district court’s order granting summary…
Continue Reading
Previous118119120121122123124Next

Recent Articles

§ 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

Inherent Power — Circumstantial Evidence — Fact That Bad Faith May Be Shown by Establishing That Conduct Was So Egregious It Was Necessarily Committed in Bad Faith Does Not Mean That Bad Faith Must Be The Sole Explanation for The Bad Conduct

RICO Causation: Testing Labs’ Misstatements As to Alcohol Tests’ Efficacy Not Communicated to Plaintiffs’ Employers Did Not Cause Plaintiffs’ Professional Harm

Supreme Court: Standing — When The Government Prohibits Or Impedes Company A from Using Company B’s Product, Both Are Objects of the Government’s Action And Have Standing to Contest It — “To Demonstrate Standing, Plaintiffs Must Answer A Basic Question—‘What’s It To You?’” (Good Quote) — Expert Evidence Not Required to Establish Standing — “Judges Are Not Required To Exhibit A Naiveté From Which Ordinary Citizens Are Free’” (Good Quote)

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

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