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

Rule 16(f) & 37(b) Dismissal Sanction for Pro Se’s Failure to Appear for 2 Pretrial Conferences — Noncompliance with Pretrial Orders Is Willful If Party Warned of Obligation to Appear — Pro Se Must Comply with Court Orders

Johnson v. NYC, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7098 (2d Cir. April 20, 2016): Plaintiff-Appellant Brenda Johnson, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's judgment sua sponte dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to comply with court orders …
Continue Reading

Real-Party-in-Interest: President of Corp. Is Not RPI in Corp.’s Action on Lease, Even If Pres. Provided Money for Lease — RICO: 4 Mandatory Elements to Plead Mail/Wire Fraud (11th Circuit) — Appeals: Rule 3 Interpreted Liberally

Symonette v. V.A. Leasing Corp., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 6843 (11th Cir. April 15, 2016): Maurice Symonette and Ferris Rhodes, Jr. appeal the district court's dismissal of their complaint alleging that V.A. Leasing Corporation ("V.A. Leasing") and Euro Motor Sport,…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions: Forum-Shopping ≠ Improper Purpose If Jurisdiction Is Arguable — No Answer to Say Movant Unhappy with Other Court — Objective Reasonableness Is Tough Standard: Aggressive ≠ Unreasonable (Good Quotes) — Supp. v Amended Complaint

Predator Int’l, Inc. v. Gamo Outdoor USA, Inc., 793 F.3d 1177 (10th Cir. 2015): Attorney John Cogswell appeals the imposition of a Rule 11 sanction. Acting on behalf of Predator International, Inc., Cogswell filed a lawsuit in April 2009 in …
Continue Reading

Social Media (Twitter, Facebook, Etc.) Authentication — Louisiana Adopts the “Reasonable Juror” / Circumstantial-Evidence Approach: Is There Proof from Which a Reasonable Juror Could Find That the Evidence Is What the Proponent Claims?

State v. Smith, 2016 La. App. LEXIS 760 (La. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 2016): [Pg 1] Defendant Demontre Smith ("Mr. Smith") seeks review of the trial court's November 18, 2015 ruling that denied his motion to exclude digital evidence for …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Claims That Survived Rule 12(c) and 56 Motions and Were Supported by Multiple Witnesses Not Sanctionable under Rule 11, § 1927 or Inherent Power — District Judge in Best Position to Evaluate Sanctions (Good Quote)

Duranseau v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 6112 (8th Cir. Apr. 4, 2016) Harvey Duranseau sued Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC (PRA), alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq.,…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Tangible Evidence — Negligence Still Enough in 6th Circuit — No Adverse Inference Instruction If Moot in Light of Governing Law and No Default Judgment If Insufficient Prejudice or Egregiousness

McCarty v. Liberty Mut. Agency Mkts., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2696 (6th Cir. Feb. 16, 2016): David McCarty, a subcontractor, was killed during the installation of a garage door at the Defendant-Appellee Covol Fuels (Covol) coal mine in Muhlenberg County,…
Continue Reading

RICO Injunctive Relief Allowed (Circuit Split) — Request for Legal Relief Doesn’t Preclude Asset Freeze to Preserve Availability of Equitable Relief (Disgorgement) — Alternative Pleading OK — Motions to Strike Disfavored

Absolute Activist Value Master Fund Ltd. v. Devine, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52263 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 19, 2016): This matter comes before the Court on defendant Susan Devine's Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. #96) filed on September 29,…
Continue Reading
Previous179180181182183184185Next

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