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

RICO: Non-Specific Allegations of Relationship and Continuity Fail to Plausibly Allege Pattern — No Conspiracy If No Substantive Violation — Diversity: No Right to Have Jury Determine Domicile

Yagman v. Gabbert, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5019 (9th Cir. Mar. 21, 2017): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Plaintiff-Appellant Stephen Yagman appeals the district court's…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — No Adverse Inference Instruction for Video Recorded over in Ordinary Course of Business Where It Did Not Depict the Relevant Incident and Opponent Failed to Issue a Timely Request for Production [or Preservation] of It (Pre-37(e))

Parrish v. Dollar Gen. Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3568 (6th Cir. Feb. 27, 2017): This case involves the review of three decisions by the trial court: a denial of a motion to continue because of alleged nondisclosure of a…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Court May Take Judicial Notice of Proceedings in Other Courts — Document Posted on Government Website Is Presumptively Authentic If Government Sponsorship Can Be Verified by Visiting the Website Itself

Bowmanv. Fister, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152569 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 3, 2016): Vivian Janet Bowman is a resident of Lexington, Kentucky. Proceeding without counsel, Bowman has filed a civil complaint against defendants Rhonda Fister and the Fayette County Public School…
Continue Reading

Internet Evidence — Website of Parent Can’t Be Attributed to Subsidiary under Rule 801(d)(2)(D) Absent Showing That Parent Was Sub’s Agent & Statements Were Made within the Scope of the Agency

Venegas v. Globa Aircraft Serv., Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130164 (D. Me. Sept. 23, 2016): Before the Court is the Defendants' joint motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 (ECF No. 100). For the…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions — More Probing Appellate Review — Vexatious Litigant Injunctions & All Writs Act — Factors — Extrajudicial Misconduct: Acts before District Court Sanctionable by Bankruptcy Court Because in Same Case

Matter of Carroll (Carroll v. Abide, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4367 (5th Cir. Mar. 13, 2017): PER CURIAM: The bankruptcy court declared William Douglas Carroll, Carolyn K. Carroll, Pamela K. Alonso, and Cynthia G. O'Neal vexatious litigants and set forth …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — U.S. Patent Office Records on 12(b)(6) Motion Only for the Limited Purpose of Showing Dates of Filings and Actions Described Therein

Morton & Bassett, LLC v. Organic Spices, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120092 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 6, 2016): Before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant-Counterclaimant Organic Spices, Inc. ("Defendant"). Dkt. No. 40 ("Mot."). Defendant moves to…
Continue Reading

RICO: Parallel Conduct, Even with Knowledge of Others’ Acts, Cannot Support a Plausible Inference of Agreement or Relationships Needed to State Enterprise — Twombly Parallel-Conduct Standard Also Applies to Conspiracy

Almanza v. United Airlines, Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4377 (11th Cir. Mar. 13, 2017): Some find travel taxing. Plaintiffs in this case are among them, but not for the usual reasons. Plaintiffs are Mexican nationals who, in flying with …
Continue Reading
Previous145146147148149150151Next

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