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

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LEXIS 7758 (5th Cir. May 2, 2017): *   Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances…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

Rule 11 Sanctions for Recklessly Furthering Fraud, Defending False St. Ct. Complaint—Dismissal + Monetary Sanctions (Rules 11, 16(f), 37, § 1927, Inherent Power)—Ability to Pay under § 1927 (Circuit Split)—Invited Error (Good Quote)

Danubis Grp., LLC v. Landmark Am. Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6499 (11th Cir. April 17, 2017): PER CURIAM: Attorney Kevin Ambler appeals the district court's imposition of sanctions against him for misconduct related to discovery and his pre-trial…
Continue Reading
Previous135136137138139140141Next

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

RICO: Employer Suffered Harm to Business or Propoerty When Kickbacks Paid to Employees in Real Estate Transactions Done for Employer — Expert Testimony Sufficient to Prove Harm — Proof That Employer Paid Above-Market Prices Not Essential — Non-Disclosure of Certain Damages in Initial Disclosures Cured by Expert Report, Which Also Rendered Initial Non-Disclosure Harmless

Spoliation: Dismissal Under Rule 37(e)(2) and Monetary Sanctions Under Rule 37(e)(1), Implicitly Reading The “Or” Between 37(e)(1) and 37(e)(2) As Conjunctive, Not Disjunctive — Clear Error Standard of Review for District Court’s Intent (= Bad Faith) Finding under 37(e)(2)(C) — Additional Monetary Sanctions Imposed on Claimants under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and Rule 37(a)(5) — No Right to Jury Determination of Intent under Rule 37(e)(2) — “Substantially Justified” in Rule 37(a)(5) Has Same Meaning As In Equal Access to Justice Act and Thus Rule 11 — Meaning of “Unreasonable and Vexatious” in 7th Circuit

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

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

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