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

Despite Cunningham, Sanction of Striking FSIA Defense (to Litigating at All) Is Immediately Appealable — It Is Also Beyond the Court’s Power — But Lesser Sanctions That Produce the Same Result Are OK

Funk v. Belneftekhim, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11587 (2d Cir. June 29, 2017): In this action, originally filed in New York State court, plaintiffs Emanuel Zeltser and Vladlena Funk sue defendants Concern Belneftekhim [*2]  ("BNTK") and Belneftekhim USA, Inc. ("BUSA") …
Continue Reading

Facebook / Instagram Authentication — Just Because a Photo Appears on Social Media Doesn’t Mean You Have to Authenticate the Page or ID the Owner to Authenticate the Photo, If the Photo Itself Is the Relevant Evidence

United States v. Thomas, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11781 (6th Cir. June 30, 2017): A jury convicted Jabron Thomas of armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d); brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, …
Continue Reading

Text, Twitter Authentication by Evidence Texts, Tweet Sent from Phone of Defendant, Who Knew Its Passcode; App Was Created with Email Address Using His Name; Phone Had Photo of Object in His Room — Not Hearsay But Admissions

Atkins v. Commonwealth, 2017 Va. App. LEXIS 160 (Va. Ct. App. July 5, 2017): Hassan Christopher Atkins appeals his convictions for three counts of breaking and entering and three counts of grand larceny, in violation of Code §§ 18.2-89 and…
Continue Reading

Sanctions for Violating Local Rule (Conduct Unbecoming Member of the Bar), Unlike Inherent Power Sanctions, Don’t Require Bad Faith Finding — Appeals Court May Consider Supplemental D.Ct. Memo Explaining Order on Appeal

In re Hermesmeyer, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 7758 (5th Cir. May 2, 2017): *   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 limited circumstances…
Continue Reading

§ 1927 Sanctions on Appeal Potentially Apt for Misuse of Motion to Strike Seeking Excision of Arguments — Arguments Should Be Addressed in Merits Brief, and Motion to Strike Is Not Vehicle for Extra Pages

Reeser v. Henry Ford Hosp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10433 (6th Cir. June 8, 2017): Plaintiff Natalie Reeser appeals the district court's order granting in part and denying in part her motion for attorneys' fees. Reeser sought $315,133.32 in fees…
Continue Reading

Texts Authenticatable Circumstantially (Testimony, Corroborative Facts, Distinctive Characteristics, Process, Etc.) — Testimony re Use of Cellebrite≠Expert Evidence — Mention of Name≠Hearsay — Must Try to ID/Locate Unidentified Texters

State v. Moss, 2017 Del. LEXIS 271 (Del. Sup. Ct. June 28, 2017): This 28th day of June 2017, upon consideration of the briefs and record on appeal, it appears to the Court that: (1) Malik J. Moss ("Moss") appeals…
Continue Reading
Previous124125126127128129130Next

Recent Articles

RICO: Fraudulent Concealment Must Prevent Discovery of the Injury to Toll Statute of Limitations

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Abuse of Discretion Review = Legal Conclusions De Novo. Factual Findings for Clear Error — (2) Client May Be Sanctioned for Misconduct of Its Counsel, Though Here Client Was Directly Involved in Bad Faith Misbehavior — (3) Is There A Difference, Under Rule 11 As Opposed to Rule 37, Concerning Whether A Client Can Be Sanctioned for Its Counsel’s Misconduct? — (4) While Sanctions of Last Resort (Dismissal/Default) Are Apt Only If Lesser Sanctions Wouldn’t Ensure Compliance, Rule 37 Doesn’t Require the Vain Gesture of First Imposing Lessert Sanctions When It Is Clear They Would be Ineffective — (5) Court’s Reconsideration of Non-Final Orders Is Governed by Rule 54(b), And Court’s Discretion under That Rule Is Governed by the Law-of-the-Case-Doctrine

RICO: (1) Special Pleading Requirements? — (2) Although Enterprise Must Be More Than a Summation of the Predicate Acts, The Predicate Acts Can Demonstrate the Existence of the Enterprise — (3) Requirement That Association-in-Fact Exist For Purposes Other Than Just to Commit Predicate Acts Merely Requires Continuity — (4) To State an Association-in-Fact Enterprise Consisting of One Natural Person and Collection of Legal Fictions Requires Factual Detail As to How They Acted Together — (5) “A § 1962(c) Enterprise Must Be More Than An Association of Individuals Or Entities Conducting the Normal Affairs of a Defendant Corporation” (Good Quote)

RICO: (1) Fee Award May Exceed Amount Recovered — Strict Proportionality Not Required — (2) Nonmonetary Benefits and Injunctive Relief Recovered Also Relevant Factors — (3) Loss on Some Claims Need Not Result in Lowered Fees, Especially When Both Arise Out of The Same Nucleus of Operative Facts

RICO: Indirect Purchasers (Car Buyers/Renters) Lack Standing to Sue Manufacturers for RICO Violations Even Though Intermediaries (Auto Dealer Direct Purchasers) Lack Any Damages

RICO: Statutory Requirement that RICO Be Liberally Construed Does Not Establish a More Liberal Pleading Standard for RICO Claims — “To Be Sure, Adequately Pleading a RICO Claim Can Be Challenging” (Good Quote) — Court May Dismiss Action Pursuant to Rule 41(b) Absent A Motion

Electronic Spoliation/Rule 37(e): (1) Finding of Recklessness But Neither Gross Negligence Nor Willfulness in Loss of Video Evidence Precludes Rule 37(e)(2)’s Severest Sanctions Because (i) No Intent to Deprive and (ii) Rule 37(e)(2) Displaces District Court’s Power to Invoke Inherent Power to Impose Those Sanctions — (2) Appellate Review = Abuse of Discretion, With The Caveat That Whether The District Court Applied The Correct Legal Standards Is Reviewed De Novo — (3) Inherent Power Is Often Available As An Alternate Source of Sanctioning Power But Can Be Limited by Rule or Statute, Something Which Courts Do Not Lightly Presume — (4) The Text of Rule 37(e)(2), As Confirmed by the Advisory Committee Note, Displaces Inherent Power to Impose the Sanctions Specified in the Rule or Any More Severe Sanctions — (5) “Intent to Deprive” in Rule 37(e)(2) = “The Willful Destruction Of Evidence With The Purpose Of Avoiding Its Discovery By An Adverse Party” — (6) Appellate Standing Conferred by Virtue of Issuance of Sanctions Regardless of Merits Outcome — (7) Value of Advisory Committee Notes in Interpreting Rules Enacted without Change Despite General Reticence to Rely on Legislative History

RICO: (1) Plaintiff Need Not Suffer Injury from Each Predicate Act to Establish Standing, And The Pattern May Include Predicates As to Which No Plaintiff Has Standing — (2) 7 Elements of a Civil RICO Claim (2d Circuit Articulation) Which Must Be Established As to Each Defendant — (3) Requirements of an Association-in-Fact Enterprise — (4) Each Defendant Must Personally Commit 2 or More Predicate Acts — (5) Pattern of Racketeering Activity: Horizontal and Vertical Elements — (6) No Requirement That All Members of a RICO Enterprise Joined at Inception — Can Join Over Time/Others Can Quit — (7) Cannot Charge 2 Predicate Acts Where One Action Violates Two Statutes — (8) A Footnote to Consider for Briefs: “Unless Otherwise Noted, When Quoting Judicial Decisions This Order Accepts All Alterations And Omits All Citations, Footnotes, And Internal Quotation Marks.”

For An Appeal to Be Timely, A Motion for Reconsideration in The District Court (A Rule 59(e) Motion) Must Be Filed, And Not Just Served within 30 Days of The Decision, to Toll The 30-Day Period for Filing An Appeal

There Is No Good-Faith Defense For Issuing An Overly Burdensome Subpoena

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