Joseph Hage Aaronson

Joint Defense/Common Interest Privilege: Direct Communications among Clients Unprivileged unless Purpose Is to Solicit or Communicate Legal Advice — One Client’s Reporting His or Her Research to Another Not Protected

United States v. Krug, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 15643 (2d Cir. Aug. 18, 2017): Appeal from the December 10, 2016 order of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Skretny, J.) precluding the government from…

Rule 68 vs. Sanctions: While Unaccepted Offer of Full Judgment under Either R. 67 or 68 Does Not Moot a Claim, Refusal to Accept the Offer May Be Sanctionable under § 1927, the Inherent Power or Even Rule 11

Conrad v. Boiron, Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16180 (7th Cir. Aug. 24, 2017): Chad Conrad filed a class action against Boiron for deceptive marketing, but he was left with only his individual claim after the district court refused to …

Disqualification in Federal Court Is Decided under Ethics Rules of State in Which Court Sits (Rule 1.9), Not under a Federal Standard — What Is “Substantially Related” — Implications of Passage of Time — Court May Rely on Commentary to Rules

Watkins v. Trans Union, LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16016 (7th Cir. Aug. 22, 2017): Plaintiff Richard Watkins has sued Trans Union for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The merits of his claims are not the subject of this …

RICO “Nexus” Element — Needed Relationship among Defendant, D’s Involvement in Enterprise’s Affairs and Pattern — Same in Civil, Criminal Cases — Racketeering Must Be One Means by Which Defendant Participates in Enterprise’s Affairs

United States v. Ferriero, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 14358 (3d Cir. Aug. 4, 2017): Joseph A. Ferriero appeals his judgments of conviction, forfeiture, and sentence based on violations of the Travel Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1952, the Racketeer Influenced and…

Discovery Misconduct Warranting Adverse Inference That Leads to Dismissal Does Not Require the Willfulness or Bad Faith That Is Required for Discovery Misconduct Directly Warranting Dismissal (Fed. Cir. Applying 2d Cir. Law)

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Merus NV, 2017 WL 3184400 (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2017): *1 Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”) appeals from a final judgment of the district court holding U.S. Patent No. 8,502,018 (“’018 patent”) unenforceable because of Regeneron’s inequitable …

Arbitration: Diversity Jurisdiction over FAA Petition (to Compel) Is Determined by Reference to Parties to the Petition — Federal Question Jurisdiction Is Determined by Looking Through to See If Underlying Dispute Raises Federal Question

Hermés of Paris, Inc. v. Swain, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 15027 (2d Cir. Aug. 14, 2017): Respondent-appellant Matthew Swain appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Colleen McMahon, Chief Judge).…

RICO: Parent Company Lacks Standing to Sue for Injuries to Subs — Strict 9(b) Application to Mail, Wire Fraud — Conspiracy Claim Falls with Underlying Substantive Violation

Am. Biocare Inc. v. Howard & Howard Attys. PLLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 15776 (6th Cir. Aug. 17, 2017): The plaintiff companies allege that the defendants [*2] and other non-parties to the suit engaged in a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt…

Twitter & Facebook Authentication: Circumstantial Evidence — Selfies, Corroboration of Contents (Rival Gangs, Animus), Community Awareness, Use of Phone to Log in — Rule 403: Prejudice Unfair If to Elicit Bias, Sympathy, Hatred, Contempt, Retribution

Stat v. Alias, 2017 WL 3575871 (Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. Aug. 18, 2017): *1 This case arose after a shooting occurred at Walter P. Taylor Homes apartment complex (Walter P.) on October 3, 2014, resulting in the death of the…

CAFA Local Controversy Exception: Court Is Bound by Complaint, Can’t Look to Other Evidence (Internet) — Factors for Judging If Local Defendants Can Provide “Significant Relief” or Their Conduct Is a “Significant Basis” for Suit

Christmas v. Union Pac. R.R., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11724 (9th Cir. June 30, 2017): Plaintiff-Appellant Elon Christmas ("Christmas") filed a class action complaint in the Superior Court of California on February 5, 2015 alleging that Defendant Union Pacific Railroad…

RICO—Is Any Act of Criminal Copyright Infringement a Predicate Or Only Egregious Ones?—Enterprise: Affiliated Corps: Need “Something More”? (2 Case Law Splits)—Conspiracy: Agreement Inferable—Pattern Extends Thru Era of Violations

Synopsys, Inc. v. Ubiquiti Networks, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130070 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 15, 2017): This case stems from the purported interest of defendants Ubiquiti Network Inc., UNIL, and Ching-Han Tsai to review and evaluate for licensing plaintiff …

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Joint Defense/Common Interest Privilege: Direct Communications among Clients Unprivileged unless Purpose Is to Solicit or Communicate Legal Advice — One Client’s Reporting His or Her Research to Another Not Protected

Rule 68 vs. Sanctions: While Unaccepted Offer of Full Judgment under Either R. 67 or 68 Does Not Moot a Claim, Refusal to Accept the Offer May Be Sanctionable under § 1927, the Inherent Power or Even Rule 11

Disqualification in Federal Court Is Decided under Ethics Rules of State in Which Court Sits (Rule 1.9), Not under a Federal Standard — What Is “Substantially Related” — Implications of Passage of Time — Court May Rely on Commentary to Rules

RICO “Nexus” Element — Needed Relationship among Defendant, D’s Involvement in Enterprise’s Affairs and Pattern — Same in Civil, Criminal Cases — Racketeering Must Be One Means by Which Defendant Participates in Enterprise’s Affairs

Discovery Misconduct Warranting Adverse Inference That Leads to Dismissal Does Not Require the Willfulness or Bad Faith That Is Required for Discovery Misconduct Directly Warranting Dismissal (Fed. Cir. Applying 2d Cir. Law)

Arbitration: Diversity Jurisdiction over FAA Petition (to Compel) Is Determined by Reference to Parties to the Petition — Federal Question Jurisdiction Is Determined by Looking Through to See If Underlying Dispute Raises Federal Question

RICO: Parent Company Lacks Standing to Sue for Injuries to Subs — Strict 9(b) Application to Mail, Wire Fraud — Conspiracy Claim Falls with Underlying Substantive Violation

Twitter & Facebook Authentication: Circumstantial Evidence — Selfies, Corroboration of Contents (Rival Gangs, Animus), Community Awareness, Use of Phone to Log in — Rule 403: Prejudice Unfair If to Elicit Bias, Sympathy, Hatred, Contempt, Retribution

CAFA Local Controversy Exception: Court Is Bound by Complaint, Can’t Look to Other Evidence (Internet) — Factors for Judging If Local Defendants Can Provide “Significant Relief” or Their Conduct Is a “Significant Basis” for Suit

RICO—Is Any Act of Criminal Copyright Infringement a Predicate Or Only Egregious Ones?—Enterprise: Affiliated Corps: Need “Something More”? (2 Case Law Splits)—Conspiracy: Agreement Inferable—Pattern Extends Thru Era of Violations

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

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

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 Office