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

Sanctions for Failure to Disclose Insurance Coverage under Rule 26(a)(1) Not Waived If Not Raised in District Court — Rule 26(g)(3) Mandates Sanctions Sua Sponte for Breach of Disclosure Duty

Food Team Int’l, Ltd. v. Unilink, LLC, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 23732 (3d Cir. Dec. 17, 2014): D. Rule 26 Sanctions The parties dispute whether the District Court should have sanctioned Defendants and their counsel for their failure to disclose …
Continue Reading

Email/Text — Text Messages on Cell Phone Found on Vehicle Occupied by Only One Person Sufficiently Tied to Person by Circumstantial Evidence (Contents of Messages) = Admissions, Declarations against Interest

Jiminez v. State, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 12737 (Tex. Ct. App. Nov. 25, 2014): Appellant Martin Robeles Jimenez was convicted by a jury of possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine, in an amount of four grams or more but less…
Continue Reading

Fact That Document Is Publicly Available Does Not Justify Failure to Disclose It under Rule 26(a)(1) to Provide Notice to Adversary — Failure to Disclose Leads to Preclusion under Rule 37(c)

Martino v. Kiewit New Mexico, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 1457 (5th Cir. Jan. 29, 2015): I. Background This dispute arose out of a construction worksite accident in which Gomez, one of Kiewit's employees, ran over Martino with a "skid steer," …
Continue Reading

Instagram — Testimony That Witness Downloaded Photo from Instagram and Third Party’s Cell = Sufficient Authentication Where Photo Clearly Showed Defendant — No Need for Expert Evidence as to Downloading Process

In re D.H., 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 867 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2015):     D.H. appeals from a judgment entered in a proceeding under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602. He contends (1) the juvenile court erred by admitting…
Continue Reading

Rule 68 — Circuit Split as to Validity of Unapportioned Offer of Judgment to Multiple Plaintiffs — Where Offer Doesn’t Break Out Statutorily Awardable Fees, Judgment = Reasonable Fees + Verdict — Are Fees Available for Nominal Verdict?

Doe v. Rutherford Cnty., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13200 (M.D. Tenn. Feb. 4, 2015): Following a jury trial, the jury entered a verdict in favor of the defendant on all counts other than plaintiff Jane Doe's Title IX retaliation claim.…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions on Client for Legally Frivolous Claims Reversed Even Though Issue First Raised on Appeal — Counsel’s Conflict below Excuses Untimely Assertion — Reassertion of Previously Dismissed Claims Sanctionable

Mitchel v. City of Santa Rosa, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 1348 (9th Cir. Jan. 28, 2015): The district court did not err by concluding that the identified claims were legally unfounded and therefore sanctionable. See Fed. R. Civ. P.…
Continue Reading

Federal Jurisdiction: Does the Domestic Relations Exception Apply Only to Cases Brought under Diversity Jurisdiction Or to All Cases over Which Federal Courts Have Subject Matter Jurisdiction? Circuit Split

Edelglass v. State of N.J., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5320 (D.N.J. Jan. 16, 2015): The domestic relations [*24]  exception to federal diversity jurisdiction was first raised in Barber v. Barber, 21 How. 582, 16 L. Ed. 226 (1859). In 1992, …
Continue Reading

Grupo Mexicano Inapt If Equitable Relief Sought — General Jurisdiction after Daimler — Specific Jurisdiction over Non-Parties — No Waiver of Defense That Didn’t Exist Below — Civil Contempt Can’t Be Punitive

Gucci Am., Inc. v. Bank of China¸ 768 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2014): This case arises out of the legal efforts of a number of luxury goods retailers to protect their intellectual property and stop alleged counterfeiters from marketing fake …
Continue Reading
Previous224225226227228229230Next

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