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: Plaintiff May Name All Members of Associated-in-Fact Enterprise As Defendants If They Are Separate & Distinct from Enterprise — Officer Is Distinct from Corp. But Corp. + Sub + Officers + Employees Are Not Distinct

Moran v. Bromma, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 908 (9th Cir. Jan. 18, 2017): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Plaintiffs Mark Moran and Patricia Bailey White …
Continue Reading

Federal Jurisdiction: Does the Probate Exception — Barring Federal Jurisdiction over Wills, Estate Administration and Disposition of Property in Probate Court — Extend to Federal Question as Well as Diversity Jurisdiction? — Circuit Split

Matter of Boisseau, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11964 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 30, 2017): I. INTRODUCTION On May 10, 2016, the Hanover HHR Employee Benefit Plan ("Plan") removed this action to the Northern District of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § …
Continue Reading

Rule 16(f) Sanctions Require Violation of Unambiguous Order — Order Permitting Discovery by One Party But Silent As to Other Does Not Unambiguously Bar Discovery by Other — Permission Presumptively Unneeded under Rule 26

Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition v. Dist. of Columbia, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1193 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2017):   Like many municipalities around the country, the District of Columbia regulates the manner in which members of …
Continue Reading

Diversity Jurisdiction — Statutory Damages, Civil Penalties and Attorney’s Fees Totaled to Determine Amount in Controversy — Only Accrued Attorney’s Fees or Likely Future Fees, Too? — Caselaw Split

Hall v. FCA US, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113376 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2016): On March 30, 2016, plaintiffs Dennis Hall and Michelle Hall filed this action against defendant FCA US, LLC in the Kern County Superior Court, alleging …
Continue Reading

If Arbitration Clause Incorporates Organization’s Rules, It Is the Version in Effect at Signing — FAA’s Presumption in Favor of Arbitration Doesn’t Apply to Whether Agreement to Arbitrate Exists, Does Apply to Interpretation of Scope

Lenox Corp. v. Blackshear, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177170 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 22, 2016): Plaintiff Lenox Corporation ("Lenox") brings suit against Defendants Thomas Blackshear, Roger W. Rawls, Blackshear Enterprises, Inc., and Keepsakes and Collectables, LLC1 alleging trademark infringement, unfair competition,…
Continue Reading

Rule 37 Sanctions: Broad Judicial Discretion, Multifactor Test (2d Cir.) — May Plaintiff Proceed to Trial Anonymously: Discretionary, Multifactor Test — Waiver of Privilege Reviewed for Abuse of Discretion

Doe v. Delta Airlines Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21270 (2d Cir. Nov. 29, 2016):  UPON DUE CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the orders of the District Court be and hereby are AFFIRMED. Plaintiff-Appellant…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions — $100,000 in Fees for Frivolous Bankruptcy (Ch. 7) Filing — Bad Faith Need Not Be Shown by Clear and Convincing Evidence — Bad Faith Finding Reviewed for Clear Error

In re Little Rest Twelve, Inc. (Zeltser v. Little Rest Twelve, Inc.), 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21803 (11th Cir. Dec. 8, 2016): Emanuel Zeltser appeals a bankruptcy court's orders sanctioning him for filing a bankruptcy petition in bad faith and…
Continue Reading

Adverse Inference against Client Based on His Lawyer’s Invocation of Fifth Amendment — No Claim in NY for Harm to C Based on A’s Deception of B and B’s Action in Reliance, But C Has Claim If B Conveyed the Misstatement & C Relied on It Directly

Amusement Indus., Inc. v. Stern, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163036 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 10, 2016): Plaintiff Amusement Industry, Inc. ("Amusement") moves for summary judgment as against defendant Moses Stern. In a report and recommendation dated August 10, 2016 [DI 862] (the…
Continue Reading
Previous151152153154155156157Next

Recent Articles

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

nherent 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

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

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