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 11 Sanctions for Complaint — Two-Pronged Inquiry: (a) Whether Complaint Is Objectively Frivolous and (b) Whether Attorney Conducted A Reasonable Inquiry; (2) Relevant Factors Include Access To Information, Experience Of Attorney Versus The Level Of Specialized Expertise Necessary, Whether The Allegations Are Related To Knowledge, Purpose, Or Intent, The Relation Of Allegedly Frivolous Claim To The Pleading As A Whole, Length Of Time The Attorney Had To Investigate, And The Complexity Of The Case

Persian Gulf, Inc. v. Alon United States Energy, Inc., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 34169 (9th Cir. Dec. 26, 2023) (unpublished) MEMORANDUM* *1 In these consolidated cases, Defendant-Appellant Alon USA Energy, Inc. (Alon) appeals the district court’s denial of its…
Continue Reading

Spoliation Sanctions — Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e) —Adverse Inference — Fifth Circuit Equates “Intent to Deprive Another Party of the Information’s Use in the Litigation” with Its Traditional Test of “‘Bad Faith’ or ‘Bad Conduct’”

Ford v. Anderson Cnty., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 506 (5th Cir. Jan. 8, 2024) Per Curiam: On June 15, 2018, pretrial detainee Rhonda Newsome died in Anderson County Jail due to complications [*2]  from Addison’s disease. Newsome’s family members filed…
Continue Reading

Criminal Spoliation — Eleventh Circuit Has Never Ruled That A Spoliation Instruction Should Be Given in a Criminal Case, But Holds That Bad Faith Would Be Required Were It Ever To So Rule — Also Surveying Other Circuits’ Law on Criminal Spoliation

United States v. Fey, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 34456 (11th Cir. Dec. 28, 2023): Criminal Spoliation — Eleventh Circuit Has Never Ruled That A Spoliation Instruction Should Be Given in a Criminal Case, But Holds That Bad Faith Would Be …
Continue Reading

Rule 37(d) and 41(b) Dismissal Sanction: (1) Sixth Circuit Factors (Bad Faith/Fault, Prejudice, Warning, Lesser Sanctions Considered); (2) Deliberate Disregard of Court Order Excuses District Court’s Failure to Warn Litigant That Case Could Be Dismissed (Here, Opposing Counsel Had So Warned in Writing); (3) While Lesser Sanctions Should Be Considered, District Court May Dismiss As First And Only Sanction; (4) Type of Misconduct Justifying Dismissal with Prejudice

Moore v. Erickson, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 26639 (6th Cir. Oct. 5, 2023) (unpublished) ORDER *1 In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Anthony Lamont Moore, a former Michigan prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals a district court judgment imposing costs…
Continue Reading

Spoliation Sanctions: Sixth Circuit Standards — Using Residential Funding Framework For Electronic Spoliation — Call to Ethics Hotline Absent Threat of Litigation or Preservation Demand Insufficient to Trigger Duty to Preserve

Goodale v. Elavon, Inc., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 32861 (6th Cir. Dec. 12, 2023) (unpublished) ORDER Elizabeth Ann Goodale, proceeding through counsel, appeals the district court’s judgment in favor of Elavon, Inc., on her employment-discrimination claims. The parties have waived…
Continue Reading

Disqualification: Lawyers Who Initially Represented A Group of Plaintiffs But Ended Up Representing Only 2 Of Them Because the Group Couldn’t Agree on a Remedy Were Not Subject to Disqualification by Former Clients Because \ Disagreement as to Remedy Was Not Materially Adverse to the Former Clients

Whitest v. Crisp Cnty. Sch. Dist., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 32934 (11th Cir. Dec. 13, 2023) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: [*2]  On June 14, 2017, Crandall Postell and numerous co-plaintiffs, represented by Bryan L. Sells and ACLU-affiliated attorneys, filed a lawsuit…
Continue Reading

(1) Rule 37 Sanctions: Court’s Discretion Narrows As the Severity of the Sanction Increases; (2) Party Does Not Waive Personal Jurisdiction Defense by Moving to Set Aside Default

Hawkeye Gold, LLC v. China Nat’l Materials Indus. Imp. & Exp. Corp., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 33531 (8th Cir. Dec. 19, 2023) Appellant Hawkeye Gold, LLC, an Iowa-based seller of livestock feed, brought this action against China National Materials Industry…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions/Due Process/Vexatious Litigant Injunction: (1) Pro Se Status Relevant to Considering Whether Due Process Issue Waived Due to Failure to Assert; (2) Party Has a Right to Notice That a Vexatious Litigant Injunction Is Under Consideration and an Opportunity to Be Heard; (3) Prior Warnings of Frivolousness from Other Courts Does Not Afford Notice That Party Is at Risk of Sanction in Present Court (i.e., Distinguishing Notice of Frivolousness from Due Process Notice of Risk of Sanction)

Allen v. United States, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 33380 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 28, 2023)   Per Curiam. *1 Derrick Allen filed a pro se complaint in the Court of Federal Claims alleging that the Clerk’s Office in the United States District…
Continue Reading
Previous10111213141516Next

Recent Articles

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

Purposes of Rule 37 and Section 1927 Sanctions

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