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

Instagram/Text Admissibility — Posts Sent to and Received by Third Parties Offered for the Truth = Hearsay — Once Posts Read into Evidence and Authenticated, Additionally Testimony about Them Is Cumulative

Commonwealth v. Colon, 2017 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2067 (Pa. Super. Ct. May 25, 2017): Appellant Wilmer Colon appeals from the August 5, 2015 judgment of sentence entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County ("trial court"), following…
Continue Reading

Rule 37 Sanctions: Default Judgment Requires Willful or Bad Faith Disobedience of Discovery Order — Rule 56(d) Request for Additional Discovery to Defend Summary Judgment Requires Motion; Request in Brief Insufficient

Tobinick v. Novella, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 2637 (11th Cir. Feb. 15, 2017): Appellants Edward Lewis Tobinick, MD ("INR CA"), INR PLLC ("INR FL"), and M.D. Edward Tobinick ("Dr. Tobinick") (collectively, the "Tobinick Appellants") appeal the district court's orders striking …
Continue Reading

YouTube Admissibility — Video of Defendant Using Gang Hand Signals, Stating Name of His Gang, and Uttering Same Words Allegedly Used at Time of Shooting Relevant to Identification and Motive, Not Cumulative or Unduly Prejudicial

Ross v Santoro, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74564 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 31, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74548 (C.D. Cal. May 15, 2017): REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE Background1 1   The following summary is taken from the…
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege: Use of Corporate Email System to Communicate with Counsel = Waiver Where Employee on Notice That Company May Monitor Emails — Whether Employee Has Legitimate Expectation of Privacy Is Highly Fact-Dependent (Good Quote)

United States v. Finazzo, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3972 (2d Cir. Mar. 7, 2017): SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgments of the district court are AFFIRMED in part and VACATED and…
Continue Reading

RICO Conspiracy — Not Enough to Show Defendant’s Association with Conspirators, Knowledge of Conspiracy, Presence during Conspiratorial Discussions — Must Show Awareness of Scope of Enterprise & Objective Manifestation of Intent to Participate in It

Rosemann v. St. Louis Bank, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9075 (8th Cir. May 24, 2017): This case continues to chronicle the legal consequences flowing from Martin Sigillito's Ponzi scheme known as the British Lending Program (BLP). See, e.g., Aguilar v.…
Continue Reading

Email Evidence Admissible under R. 408 to Show Settlement Reached — Emails’ Competing, Differing Headers Declaring Emails Unusable Show Offer/Counteroffer, Not Separate Agreement — No Estoppel, Can’t Unilaterally Change Evidence Law (Good Quote)

Ian v. Whitehead, 2017 Ariz. App. Unpub. LEXIS 595 (Ariz. Ct. App. May 16, 2017): P1 Hannah Ian ("Wife") seeks special action relief from the superior court's ruling precluding the introduction of settlement-negotiation emails exchanged between her attorney and former …
Continue Reading
Previous139140141142143144145Next

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