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 & Res Judicata — Mere Addition of Claims, Defendants to Same Facts Doesn’t Avoid Preclusion Bar — Can’t Relitigate Final Judgment by Adding Subsequent Facts to Adjudicated 16-Year-Long Set of Events

Zahl v. Warhaftig, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12155 (3d Cir. July 1, 2016): Kenneth Zahl, M.D. appeals the final decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granting summary judgment in favor of a group of…
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege — 5-Factor Test Corporate Employees Claiming Corp. Counsel Represented Them Must Satisfy — What If a Reasonable Lay Person Would Misunderstand the Upjohn Warning? (See Concurrence)

United States v. Merida, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12786 (10th Cir. July 12, 2016): I. INTRODUCTION Jason Brett Merida, the former executive director of construction for the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (the Nation), was convicted after a fifteen-day jury trial …
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege: Government Official Has No Personal Privilege with Government Lawyer Consulted on Ethics Issues (Government Holds Privilege) — Perhaps Different If Government Lawyer Representing Official Personally

In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12860 (9th Cir. July 13, 2016): This case arises in the midst of an investigation by the federal government into activities of the former Governor of Oregon, John Kitzhaber. A…
Continue Reading

Voicemail Left for Employee A by Employee B, Who Was Investigating Employee A’s Race, Age & Gender Discrimination Claim, Is Admissible against Employer as an 801(d)(2) Admission

Ritchie v. Napolitano, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89279 (D.D.C. July 11, 2016): Plaintiff Scott Ritchie brings suit under (i) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII") for race discrimination; (ii) Title VII for gender discrimination; and…
Continue Reading

Rule 37(c)(1) Sanctions — Critical Witness Affidavit Struck (Resulting in Summary Judgment) for Failure to Update Per 26(e) Witness’s Address on 26(a) Disclosure or Give Affidavit — Query re Affidavit: What about Hickman v. Taylor?

Emanuel v. Cnty. of Wayne, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 11385 (6th Cir. June 20, 2016):  Plaintiff Lennox Emanuel was arrested after Wayne County Sheriff's Office personnel observed him speaking with a known prostitute, inviting the woman into his car, and…
Continue Reading

RICO Enterprise: Is Association of a Few Individuals, without Meaningful Structure, Distinct from Those Individuals? — Good Quotes on RICO Predicates & Elements, Including Interstate Commerce (All Telephone Calls Are Presumed to Be Intrastate)

Aliev v. Borukhov, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88856 (E.D.N.Y. July 8, 2016): On October 26, 2015, plaintiff Fariz Aliev ("Aliev") filed a complaint principally seeking damages against Neriya Borukhov, his brother Aron Borukhov, and two other individuals, Stella Akbashev ("Akbashev"), …
Continue Reading

RICO: Each Member of Enterprise Needn’t Know Each Other’s Role — Enough to Know General Nature of Enterprise & That It Extends Beyond His/Her Role — Conspiracy Conflation — Impact on Hub & Spoke?

United States v. Christensen, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12738 (9th Cir. July 8, 2016): Six defendants appeal their criminal convictions stemming from a widespread criminal enterprise offering illegal private investigation services in Southern California. At the center of this criminal …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Inherent Power Extends to Misconduct before Court-Supervised Settlement Program, Apt to Punish Ethics Violations — Factors in Selecting Sanction — Loosely Formulated, Imprecise Objection Doesn’t Preserve Error (Good Quote)

In re Deepwater Horizon, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10069 (5th Cir. June 2, 2016): Glen Lerner and Jonathan Andry appeal the district court's sanction order disqualifying them from further participation in the Court-Supervised Settlement Program related to the Deepwater Horizon …
Continue Reading

Does Rule 15(b)(2) — Amendment of Complaint by Trial of the Issue on Express or Implied Consent — Apply at the Summary Judgment Stage? — Circuit Split

Cedar Valley Exteriors, Inc. v. Professional Exteriors, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84868 (D. Minn. June 29, 2016): Plaintiff Cedar Valley Exteriors, Inc. ("Cedar Valley") brought this action against defendant Professional Exteriors, Inc. ("Professional Exteriors"), alleging that Professional Exteriors infringed…
Continue Reading
Previous171172173174175176177Next

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