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

Spoliation Motion Seeking Discovery- and Trial-Related Sanctions Mooted by Summary Judgment for Opponent — Adverse Inference Wouldn’t Help Survive SJ on Legal Grounds — Perfunctory Argument on Appeal Waived

Emery v. Talladega College, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8557 (11th Cir. May 16, 2017): I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Joshua Emery was a freshman at Defendant Talladega College in the fall of 2012. Defendants Billy C. Hawkins, Jacqueline W. Paddio, and Miguel…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions: Bad Faith Personal to Offender (Partner v Firm)—Reckless-Plus or Willful Blindness OK—Out-of-State Non-Appearing Lawyer, Non-Lawyer Subject to Jurisdiction—Clear & Convincing Evidence—Standing—What Is Clearly Erroneous

JTR Enters., LLC v. Columbian Emeralds, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11248 (11th Cir. June 23, 2017): JTR Enterprises, LLC ("JTR"), a company run by Jay Miscovich that was ostensibly engaged in treasure hunting, brought an admiralty action in the Southern …
Continue Reading

Email Authentication, Admissibility: 901(a) Satisfied by Showing Email Sent from Secret Account Known Only to Sender/Recipient & Contained Info Only They Knew — Use of Translator ≠ Hearsay Except Rarely (Nonexclusive Factors Given)

United States v. Zhu, 854 F.3d 247 (4th Cir. 2016): Kaixiang Zhu was convicted by a jury of conspiring to commit immigration fraud, see 18 U.S.C. § 371, and aiding and abetting fraud and misuse of immigration documents, see 18 …
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege: Communications between Attorney and 3d Party (Collection Agency) Hired by the Corporate Client Are Privileged Where 3d Party Was Specifically Hired to Find Counsel for Corporation & Is Thus Corporation’s Agent

Baylor v. Mitchell Rubenstein & Assocs., PC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9333 (D.C. Cir. May 30, 2017): In order to pursue a Master's degree in Computer Graphics, Demetra Baylor ("Appellant") took out six student loans. Several years after her graduation,…
Continue Reading

§ 1927 Sanctions OK for Repeatedly Asserting Non-Existent Facts on SJ — Taxing Costs: Video, Steno Records Serve Different Purposes, Both Allowed — Cost of Deps That Would’ve Been Needed If Case Tried OK Though Not Used on Successful SJ Motion

Maiteki v. Marten Transp., Ltd., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5366 (10th Cir. Mar. 28, 2017): *   After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this…
Continue Reading

Disqualification—(1) Order Granting or Denying a Motion to Disqualify Counsel in a Civil Case Is Not Immediately Appealable & (2) Party Lacks Standing to Disqualify Opponent’s Counsel Absent Showing That The Representation Harmed It

Two Decisions, Same Case, Two Years Apart: (1) Schneider v. Cnty. of Will, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 23265 (7th Cir. Jan. 22, 2015): IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. Generally, an appeal may not…
Continue Reading
Previous136137138139140141142Next

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