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

§ 1927 Sanctions — Notice of Appeal Filed in Name of Sanctioned Party Does Not Confer Jurisdiction over Appeal by Counsel — Liberal Construction under FRAP 3 Doesn’t Excuse Complete Non-Compliance — Test Is Objective

Payne v. Univ. of S. Miss., 681 Fed.Appx. 384 (5th Cir. 2017) (limited precedent opinion): Thomas Payne filed a civil rights lawsuit against the University of Southern Mississippi (the “University”) and several University officials in their official and individual capacities, …
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions — If a Party Forms a Belief Based on a Reasonable Inquiry Limited by a Prospective Adversary’s Withholding of Information, Asserts That Its Position “Will Likely Have Evidentiary Support,” Party Has Satisfied Rule 11

Amgen Inc.v. Hospira, Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 14747 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 10, 2017): Amgen Inc. ("Amgen") appeals an order of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware denying Amgen's motion to compel discovery from Hospira, Inc.…
Continue Reading

RICO: Failure to Allege Violations of Predicate Acts Listed in § 1961(1) Dooms Claim — Judicial Recusal: Fact Judge’s Son Is Non-Partner Lawyer at Firm Before Her Doesn’t Require Recusal

Brown v. Burch, Porter & Johnson, PLLC, 2016 WL 9448027 (6th Cir. Nov. 21, 2016):   *1 Pro se litigant Kim Brown appeals a district court judgment dismissing his civil action filed pursuant to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act…
Continue Reading

Social Media Authentication — Facebook Message Excluded for Failure to Present Evidence of Distinctive Characteristics Linking Contents Linking to Alleged Sender — Methods of Twitter & Facebook Authentication

Richardson v State, 2017 Ind. App. LEXIS 286 (Ind. Ct. App. July 6, 2017): P1 Appellant-Defendant, Terrance L. Richardson (Richardson), appeals his conviction for murder, a felony, Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1. P2 We affirm. ISSUES P3 Richardson raises two issues…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence: Attorney Affidavit of Search of Government Website Sufficient to Authenticate Printout on Summary Judgment — Testimony Chat Log Fully and Fairly Reproduces Chats Also Sufficient

Brown v. JNH Invs., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117889 (E.D. Tex. July 7, 2017):  [*1] REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONOF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Pending before the Court is Defendants JNH Investments, Inc., J and H Investments Group, LLC, John Alsenih, and…
Continue Reading

Emails May Be Authenticated Circumstantially—Party’s Emails Are Admissions, 3rd Parties’ OK for Context — Wayback Machine Authenticable by Custodian Testimony, and Other Website Printouts by Testimony from Person Who Downloaded It

United States v. Gasperini, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114166 (E.D.N.Y. July 21, 2017): Defendant Fabio Gasperini is charged with two counts of computer intrusion, one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, one count of wire fraud, and one count …
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions: Evidence Preclusion, Attorneys’ Fees for Extrajudicial Conduct Aimed at Jury Pool & Potential Witnesses (Website, Ringless Voicemails) & Ethical Violations of Lawyer-Party (Lack of Candor to the Court & Obstruction)

Diamond Consortium, Inc. v Manookian, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122625 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 3, 2017): Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' Emergency Motion for Order to Show Cause (Potential Contempt of Court and Sanctions) (the "Emergency Motion") (Dkt. 269), the…
Continue Reading
Previous131132133134135136137Next

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