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

Jurisdiction & Sanctions Post-Judgment, Pending Appeal: District Court May Enter Protective Order over Case Materials, Enter Sanctions, But Magistrate Judge May Only Issue R&R, Not Decide Post-Trial Motion That = Pretrial Motion under §636(b)(1)(A)

Springs v. Ally Fin’l Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13584 (4th Cir. July 26, 2016): Venus Yvette Springs appeals the district court's order affirming the magistrate judge's order modifying a prior protective order (No. 15-1244) and the court's order denying…
Continue Reading

Privilege/Work Product — Document May Be Work Product Even If (1) Not Prepared in Anticipation of a Specific Claim and (2) It Also Serves Non-Adversarial Purposes, As Long As It Was Prepared Because of the Prospect of Litigation

Nat’l Ass’n of Criminal Defense Lawyers v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13141 (D.C. Cir. July 19, 2016): The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers submitted a request under the Freedom of [*2]  Information Act to obtain …
Continue Reading

Rule 26(a) Disclosures & 37(c)(1) Sanctions — A Computation of Statutory Attorney’s Fees That Are Awardable after Obtaining, & in Addition to, a Successful Judgment Is Not a Required Disclosure under Rule 26(a)

Smith v AS America, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12917 (8th Cir. July 14, 2016): AS America, Inc. d/b/a American Standard Brands (ASB) denied Thomas Smith's request for intermittent Federal Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave and fired him after he …
Continue Reading

Social Media Authentication by Testimony That Pages Ostensibly Belonging to Parties Were Found by Using Their Names, DOB, Zip Codes & Other Identifying Info, and That Printouts of Photos & Captions Accurately Reflected What Was Posted on Those Pages

Blackledge v. State, 2016 Ga. LEXIS 462 (Ga. Sup. Ct. July 5, 2016): Along with several co-defendants, Milton Blackledge was tried by a Cobb County jury and convicted of murder, violation of the Georgia Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act…
Continue Reading

Summary Judgment — District Court May Not Draw Adverse Inference Based on Non-Moving Party’s Invocation of Fifth Amendment — Applicability of Exclusionary Rule in Civil Forfeiture Cases & Interplay with Discovery Duties

In re 650 Fifth Ave. & Related Props. (U.S. v. Alavi Found.), 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13225 (2d Cir. July 20, 2016): On this appeal, we consider challenges to an award of summary judgment entered in the United States District…
Continue Reading

Experts: No Permission Needed to File Supplemental Report — Burden on Opponent to Move to Strike — May Expert Correct Opinions by Looking to Information Available at Time of Original Report? — The Risk of Lessening the Sting of Cross by Deposing

DR Distributors, LLC v. 21 Century Smoking, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99930 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 1, 2016): Defendants' motion to supplement their expert's report [171] is granted as set out in greater detail herein. The stay on expert discovery…
Continue Reading

Forum Selection Clause: Does Federal Law Govern Validity or Chosen Law? — Circuit Split — Could The Parties Resolve This in Their Contract? — Every Foreign Forum Needn’t Duplicate U.S. Remedies (Good Quote)

Barnett v. Dyncorp Int’l, LLC, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13618 (5th Cir. July 26, 2016): Plaintiff Jonathan Barnett alleges that his former employer, DynCorp International LLC, failed to give him all of the pay and benefits he was owed for…
Continue Reading
Previous169170171172173174175Next

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