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

26(a)(1) Initial Disclosures — Failure to Timely Update to Add Fact Witnesses Mentioned in Deposition Leads to Exclusion, Even Though They Were Identified 10 Months before Trial — Good Quotes on Prejudice

Ollier v. Sweetwater Union High Sch. Dist., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 18020 (9th Cir. Sept. 19, 2014): We next address the exclusion of fact witnesses. The general issue is whether witnesses not listed in Rule 26(a) disclosures–and who were identified  …
Continue Reading

Federal Arbitration Act — Inherently Biased Arbitration Clause Unenforceable — Unreasonable under M/S Bremen and Unconscionable — Does State or Federal Law Govern Forum Selection Clause in Diversity? Circuit Split

Jackson v. Payday Fin’l LLC, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16257 (7th Cir. Aug. 22, 2014): Deborah Jackson, Linda Gonnella, and James Binkowski (collectively "the Plaintiffs") initially brought this action in Illinois state court against Payday Financial, LLC, and other defendant…
Continue Reading

Does Twiqbal’s Plausibility Standard Apply to Affirmative Defenses? Case Law Split — Policy Arguments against Application (Including Reliance on Official Form, All of Which Are Heading toward Extinction)

Jam Tire, Inc. v. Harbin, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124581 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 5, 2013): Since the Supreme Court's decision in Iqbal v. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), more than 230 federal decisions have addressed whether the plausibility standard applies …
Continue Reading

Daubert — If Expert Failed to Follow Own Stated Methods, No Reliable Method Followed — Mere Expertise & Subjective Understanding ≠ Reliable Scientific Evidence (Good Quote) — De Novo Issue before Abuse of Discretion Applies

Brown v. Burlington N. Santa Fe Rwy., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16865 (7th Cir. Aug. 29, 2014): Shannon Brown appeals the dismissal of his lawsuit against the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company ("BNSF"), which he filed under the Federal…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 & § 1927 Sanctions — Quantum — Deterrence vs. Compensation — While Detailed Opinion Usually Not Needed, Conclusory Explanation for De Minimus Award Inadequate Where Misconduct Egregious

Tilmon-Jones v. Boladian, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 17522 (6th Cir. Sept. 8, 2014): In 2006 Janyce Tilmon-Jones sued defendants Bridgeport Music, Inc. and Armen Boladian for allegedly failing to pay royalties on two musical works of her late husband, Abrim …
Continue Reading

Default Judgment — Can a Letter to the Court Constitute an Answer, Defense to Complaint or Appearance? — Circuit Split — Examples of Inadequate Letters Even Where Informality Permitted

United States v. Abdul Rahim, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117621 (E.D. Va. July 25, 2014): On June 13, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against Defendant alleging willful concealment or misrepresentation of material fact to procure naturalization, and requesting revocation and…
Continue Reading
Previous239240241242243244245Next

Recent Articles

FRAP 38 and Pro Se Litigants — Observations, Not Sanctions, For Non-Existent Quotations

Rule 37(c)(1) Exclusion Sanction: Under R&R Sails, A Discovery Sanction Is Not Claim Dispositive Just Because It Makes It “Much More Difficult, Perhaps Almost Impossible” For A Party To Proceed With Its Claim Or Argument — The Sanction Must Be Fatal — Only Then Is Proof of Willfulness, Fault Or Bad Faith Required — To The Extent The Imposition Of Sanctions Turns On The Resolution Of An Issue Of Law, Review Is De Novo

Supreme Court: Party Moving to Set Aside Void Judgment Under Rule 60(b)(4) Must Do So Within A Reasonable Time Per Rule 60(c)(1)

Supreme Court: Erie/Rule 8/Rule 11: Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Conflicts with and Overrides Delaware’s Affidavit of Merit in Medical Malpractice Actions — A Valid Rule of Civil Procedure Displaces Contrary State Law Even If The State Law Is Substantive — Rule 11’s Proviso That “[U]nless A Rule Or Statute Specifical States Otherwise, A Pleading Need Not Be Verified Or Accompanied By An Affidavit” Refers to Rules Or Statutes Requiring Represented Parties To Verify Pleading Or Sign Affidavits — It Has Nothing To Do With Affidavits From Third Parties — Good Quote: Drawing A Negative Inference from Text Is Sometimes the Best Way To Understand It

RICO Statute of Limitations — Storm Warnings, Not Thunder and Lightning (Good Quote)

Rule 37 Discovery Sanctions: Ninth Circuit’s Five-Factor Test for Gauging Appropriateness of Dismissal — The Limited Utility of Rule 12(f) Motions to Strike

RICO: Employer Suffered Harm to Business or Property When Kickbacks Paid to Employees in Real Estate Transactions Done for Employer — Expert Testimony Sufficient to Prove Harm — Proof That Employer Paid Above-Market Prices Not Essential — Non-Disclosure of Certain Damages in Initial Disclosures Cured by Expert Report, Which Also Rendered Initial Non-Disclosure Harmless

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

Inherent 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?

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

© 2026 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice