Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Joseph Hage Aaronson

Greene v. Exec. Coach & Carriage, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 23218 (9th Cir. July 22, 2015): JUDGES: Before: Peter L. Shaw, Appellate Commissioner. OPINION ORDER On February 12, 2015, the court identified a false statement in the answering brief of
U.S. ex rel. Hirt v. Walgreen Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5245 (6th Cir. Mar. 23, 2017): PER CURIAM. After losing his qui tam lawsuit at the district court, Andrew Hirt, owner of Andy's Pharmacies, filed a Rule 59 motion
In re Forcefield Energy Sec. Litig., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54606, *29-30 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2017): This putative securities class action is brought by shareholders of ForceField Energy Inc. ("ForceField") alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities…
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Fla. v. Cypress, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 7519 (11th Cir. April 28, 2017): PER CURIAM: Appellees Guy A. Lewis, Michael R. Tein, and their law firm, Lewis Tein P.L., move to correct our panel opinion,…
Mains v. Citibank, N.A., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5429 (7th Cir. Mar. 29, 2017): Eric Mains has been battling the impending foreclosure of his home for quite some time. Most recently, he brought an action in federal court raising various…
Blixeth v. Cushman & Wakefield of Colo., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1943 (10th Cir. Feb. 3, 2017): *   This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral…
Aldridge v. City of Warren, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5085 (6th Cir. Mar. 20, 2017): This case involves the grant of summary judgment for defendants and the imposition of sanctions against plaintiff Joshua Aldridge arising out of a complaint that
Carucel Invs. LP v. Novatel Wireless, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50855 (S.D. Cal. April 3, 2017): *** Background On May 27, 2015, Plaintiff Carucel Investments, L.P. filed a complaint for patent infringement in the United States District Court for…

Recent Articles

RICO and Injunctions: (1) State Court Actions Designed to Perpetuate and Monetize a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable under RICO, Even Though They Are Not Themselves Alleged to Be Predicate Acts [Note: Noerr Pennington Applies in RICO Actions] — (2) Although Civil RICO’s Text and Legislative History Fail to Reveal Any Intent to Override the Provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act, Arbitrations Are Enjoinable Under the “Effective Vindication” Doctrine Where They Operate As a Prospective Waiver of a Party’s Right to Pursue Statutory RICO Remedies — (3) Arbitration Findings May Be Given Collateral Estoppel Effect in a Civil RICO Action — (4) Injunction of Non-Corrupt State Court Litigations That Furthers a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable Under the Anti-Injunction Act’s “Expressly Authorized” Exception — (5) “The Irreparable Harm Requirement Is The Single Most Important Prerequisite For The Issuance Of A Preliminary Injunction” (Good Quote) — (6) When Injunction Is Based on “Serious Questions on the Merits” Rather Than “Likelihood of Success,” Court May Rely on Unverified Pleadings and Attached Exhibits to Assess the Merits, Unless the Opponent Has Raised Substantial Questions (Here, the Opponent Failed to Request an Evidentiary Hearing) — (7) Whether Amended Pleading Moots An Appeal Turns on Whether It Materially Changes the Substantive Basis for the Appeal — (8) Meaning of “In That” (“Used To Introduce A Statement That Explains Or Gives More Specific Information” About A Prior Statement)

Archives