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

Inherent Power & § 1927 — Issuance of Overbroad Subpoena by Criminal Defense Counsel on Counsel for Co-Defendant Seeking Communications with Prosecutor Not Sanctionable — Recklessness-Plus Required for § 1927 Sanctions in 9th Circuit

United States v. Rico, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13123 (9th Cir. July 28, 2015): *** (3) Rico finally claims that we should reverse because the [*7]  district court erred when it quashed a subpoena directed by his counsel to the …
Continue Reading

Text Messages: Offer of Gun to Defendant = Non-Hearsay Verbal Act; Picture Retrieved from Cell Sufficiently Authenticated by Fact It Showed Same Make and Model Offered to & Recovered from Him — Photo Is Not Hearsay

People v. Mota, 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7216 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 8, 2015): Jose J. Mota and Karen Garcia were convicted of possession of a firearm after police observed Mota pass the gun to Garcia on a street …
Continue Reading

RICO — Associated-in-Fact Enterprise — Linchpin Is Ongoing Nature of Association — No Purpose Needed Other Than Committing Racketeering Activity

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Plambeck, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16571 (5th Cir. Sept. 17, 2015): Allstate Insurance Company ("Allstate") sued a consortium of telemarketing companies, chiropractic clinics, and affiliated law offices spanning several states, contending that they had violated the…
Continue Reading

Rule 37(c) Sanctions — Failure to Timely Amend Contention Interrogatory Can Bar Theory of Liability — Factors Guiding Discovery Sanctions (2d Circuit) — Dismissal for 26(e) Failure to Supplement as Abuse of Discretion

TNS Media Research, LLC v. Tivo Research & Analytics, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16517 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 16, 2015): Tivo Research and Analytics, Inc. dba TRA, Inc. ("TRA") appeals a judgment of the district court granting summary judgment in…
Continue Reading

When Does Attorney-Client Privilege Attach to Advice for a Response to the Media? — Caselaw Split — Factors for Determining When Counsel for Adverse Party May Be Deposed (Shelton Approach)

Alomari v Ohio Dep’t of Public Safety, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16237 (6th Cir. Sept. 9, 2015): Omar Alomari ("Plaintiff") filed suit against the Ohio Department of Public Safety ("ODPS"), ODPS Director Thomas Charles, former ODPS Director Thomas Stickrath, and…
Continue Reading

Rule 26(a)(1) Disclosure Violation — Exclusion Is the Usual Remedy, But There Are Many Alternatives — Honest Mistake as Defense to Sanctions — 6th Circuit Adopts 4th Circuit’s 5-Factor Test for Substantial Justification / Harmless Error

Howe v. City of Akron, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16529 (6th Cir. Sept. 17, 2015): In 2004, Defendant-Appellant City of Akron administered promotional examinations for firefighters for the ranks of Lieutenant and Captain. The Plaintiffs-Appellees [*2]  are Akron firefighters who…
Continue Reading

Hearsay — Emails from Military Personnel to NTSB at NTSB’s Formal Request, Verified as True by Declarations That Subject Authors to Court Martial in Addition to Normal Perjury Penalties, Satisfy Residual Exception (Rule 807)

Brokaw v. Boeing Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137074 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 5, 2015): The plaintiffs in these five consolidated cases–Elizabeth Brokaw, as personal representative of the estate of Jamie L. Brokaw, William Thompson, as personal representative of the estate…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 and § 1927 Sanctions Predicated on Factual Findings Concerning Foreign Corporate Transactions That Are Contradicted by Foreign Court Determinations Reversed — Arguments Thus Validated Are Not Entirely Groundless

Philos Techs., Inc. v. Philos & D, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16812 (7th Cir. Sept. 22, 2015): This lawsuit involves a complicated transaction-or set of transactions-among several related companies, most of which are based in the Republic of Korea.…
Continue Reading

Documents Obtained under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 for Use Abroad May Be Used in Subsequent U.S. Litigation (e.g., to Draft Complaint, Prepare Discovery Requests), Unless a Protective Order Bars It — Admissibility to Be Determined by Judge in 2nd Case

Glock v. Glock, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14400 (11th Cir. Aug. 17, 2015): Gaston Glock created the Glock 17 handgun for the Austrian army in 1982.1 Four years later, Glock's guns arrived in the United States.2 1   Paul M.…
Continue Reading
Previous198199200201202203204Next

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