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 Personal Jurisdiction — Does § 1965 Provide Nationwide Jurisdiction or Only Nationwide Service? — Circuit Split — Issue: Must Plaintiff 1st Establish Personal Jurisdiction Over 1 Defendant before Court May Exercise Jurisdiction Over Nonresiden

Domain Protection LLC v. Keating, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135093 (N.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2016): Before the court are Defendant Paul Keating's Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9), filed September 2, 2015; and Plaintiff Domain Protection's Motion for Reconsideration (Doc.…
Continue Reading

Appeals — Circuit Won’t Consider Args. Lacking the Reasoning, Authorities Required by FRAP 28(a)(8)(A) — RICO SOL Not Based on Last Predicate Rule — Court Construes Pro Se Filings Liberally But Isn’t Their Advocate (Good Quote)

Armstrong v Wyoming Dept. of Envt’l Quality, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 179 (10th Cir. Jan. 5, 2017): *   After examining Armstrong's brief and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument wouldn't materially assist in the determination…
Continue Reading

Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute: 5-Factor Test — Not Enough for Pro Se, after 5 Years of Litigation, to Announce He’s Not Ready to Go to Trial — Abuse of Discretion: Step 1 — Did Trial Court ID Correct Legal Rule?

Calloway v. Hayward, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10207 (9th Cir. June 6, 2016) (split panel): Plaintiff Jamisi Jermaine Calloway appeals the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his case based on his representations at a trial confirmation hearing that he…
Continue Reading

Particularly Wide Discretion Given to Rule 37(c)(1) Sanctions (Here, for Failure to Timely File Expert Reports) — Nominal Attorney’s Fees for Responding to Motion to Modify Scheduling Order for More Time to File Expert Reports, after Deadline Lapsed

LeFay v. LeFay, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 23109 (9th Cir. December 22, 2016): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.   Sharron LeFay ("Sharron") appeals the district court's…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions for Submitting Doctors’ Reports (in Moving for Continuance ) Stating Lawyer “Unable to Perform Simplest Activities of Daily Activity” Where Contradicted by Videos — No Need for Evidentiary Hearing on Rule 11

Ultegra LLC v. Mystic Fire Dist., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1009 (2d Cir. Jan. 20, 2017): UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Appellants Gretchen Chipperini and …
Continue Reading

Arbitrability — Challenge to Validity of Arbitration Clause Is for Court to Decide — Challenge to the Contract As a Whole Is for Arbitrator to Decide

S. Jersey Sanitation Co. v. Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assur. Co., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 19245 (3d Cir. Oct. 25, 2016): I. INTRODUCTION Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company, Inc. ("Applied Underwriters"), a Berkshire Hathaway Company, appeals from the District…
Continue Reading

Wayback Machine on 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss: Complaint’s Cite to Wayback Link to Historical Version of Website Affords Defendants Ability to Respond, Defeats 9(b) — Arbitration: Dispute Unrelated to Contract Outside of Broad Arbitration Clause

Dickson v. Gospel for Asia, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6473 (W.D. Ark. Jan. 18, 2017): Before the Court is Defendants' motion (Doc. 23) to compel arbitration and brief in support (Doc. 24). Plaintiffs filed a response (Doc. 31), and…
Continue Reading
Previous148149150151152153154Next

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