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 11 Sanctions OK for Advocating in Fed. Court Frivolous State Court Complaint — Res Judicata Bar — Rule 38 Inapt for Discretionary Sanctions Review — Frivolous as Argued vs. Frivolous as Filed Appeals

Meyer v. U.S. Bank N.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11595 (8th Cir. July 6, 2015): In June 2003, David and Nancy Meyer signed a revolving credit note and revolving credit agreement and later signed a series of term notes and…
Continue Reading

RICO — Extraterritoriality of RICO Aside, No Hobbs Act or Money Laundering Predicates If Misconduct Abroad — Political Question Doctrine Doesn’t Bar Adjudicating Acts of Foreign Sovereign Subject to U.S. Territorial Jurisdiction

Hourani v. Mirtchev, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13342 (D.C. Cir. July 31, 2015): Two Kazakh businessmen claim that the daughter of the President of Kazakhstan extorted hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of their business assets in Kazakhstan. She did…
Continue Reading

Appellate Sanctions — FRAP 38: Result Obvious, No Arguable Merit or Shred of Evidence — No Bad Faith Cuts Against Sanctions — §1927: Bad Faith = Recklessly Frivolous Arg. or Meritorious Arg. to Harass or Breach Duty of Candor to Court

Blixseth v. Yellowstone Mountain Club, LLC, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13559 (9th Cir. Aug. 4, 2015): In a recusal motion, Timothy Blixseth and his attorneys hurled [*3]  nineteen accusations of misconduct at a bankruptcy judge who had ruled against Blixseth. …
Continue Reading

Email Authentication — Testimony from (i) Recipient That Deceased Sent Message and (ii) Third Party That He Discussed Substance with Decedent Suffices — No Hearsay Problem when Offered for Effect on the Listener

Meyer v. Callery Conway Mars HV, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 937 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 5, 2015): This case centers on allegations that John Meyer was unlawfully discharged by his employer because of his age. The Defendant employer says that …
Continue Reading

YouTube Video Offered to Prove Gang Membership Authenticated by Police Gang Expert’s Identification of Defendant’s Use of Gang Signs, Colors & Vocabulary, Tentative Identification of Gang Location, and Contents of Defendant’s Interview

People v. Andrews, 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 3795 (Cal. Ct. App. May 28, 2015): Appellant Michael Andrews was convicted, following a jury trial, of one count of first degree murder in violation of Penal Code section 187, subdivision (a),…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — In Diversity, Federal Law Governs Adverse Inference — Factors (8th Cir.) — Since a Purpose Is to Shift Burden to Spoliator, No Instruction Against Defendant’s Insurer Where Defendant Has Assigned Rights to Plaintiff

Burris v. Gulf Underwriters Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 8707 (8th Cir. May 27, 2015): Lowell and Joyce Burris (jointly "Burris") appeal the district court's1denial of their motion for a new trial following a jury verdict in favor of…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions — Standards for Bad Faith Are Necessarily Stringent, and a Party Should Not Be Penalized for Maintaining an Aggressive Litigation Position (Good Quote) — How Frivolous Must an Argument Be to Suggest Bad Faith?

Fortune v. Taylor Fortune Grp, LLC, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13788 (5th Cir. Aug. 4, 2015): We next consider Fortune Louisiana's motion for sanctions. "[F]ederal courts possess inherent power to assess attorney's fees and litigation costs when the losing party …
Continue Reading

RICO — More Than 2 Years = Substantial Period of Time & Satisfies Closed-Ended Continuity — Pattern Doesn’t Require Multiple Schemes As Long As the Predicate Acts Aren’t Isolated or Sporadic

Kearney v. Foley & Lardner, LLP, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10279 (9th Cir. June 18, 2015): Plaintiff-Appellant Joan Brown Kearney appeals the district court's dismissal of her [*2]  42 U.S.C. § 1983; Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C.…
Continue Reading

Texts Authenticated by Testimony Witness Used Cell No. Defendant Gave Her via Facebook, Where Number Verified as Defendant’s and Defendant Acted Per Messages — Facebook Account Authenticated by True Cell Number and Contents of FB Messages

Coe v. State, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 6374 & 6440 (Tex. Ct. App. June 24, 2015): Brandon Chadwick Coe appeals his convictions for online solicitation of a minor and attempted sexual assault of a child. See Tex. Penal Code Ann.…
Continue Reading
Previous205206207208209210211Next

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