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

Hearsay Exemption of Rule 801(d)(2)(A) (An Opposing Party’s Statement) Requires Only That Statement Be Offered against a Party Opponent — Rule 804(b)(3) (Statement Against Interest) Distinguished

Matter of Romanowski, 2014 Mich. App. LEXIS 763 (Mich. Ct. App. April 22, 2014): In these consolidated appeals, respondents, the adoptive parents of the involved minor child, appeal as of right from a circuit court dispositional order placing the child…
Continue Reading

RICO — RICO Remedies Don’t Include Setting Aside Prior Judgment or Undermining Its Preclusive Effect — Loss of Claims Due to Fraud on the Court = RICO Injury — Elements of Fraud on Court and Issue Preclusion

Knight v. Phoenix Central, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 7508 (10th Cir. April 22, 2014): Judy Knight appeals from the dismissal of her lawsuit on the grounds of untimeliness, failure to state a claim, and claim preclusion (res judicata). We…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court—Sanctions—§285 Looks to Totality of Circumstances—A Case “Stands Out” If Weak or Unreasonably Litigated—Some Factors: Frivolousness, Motivation, Need to Compensate, Deter—Objective Baselessness or Bad Faith May Be Enough

Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 2014 U.S. LEXIS 3107 (U.S. April 29, 2014): Section 285 of the Patent Act authorizes a district court to award attorney's fees in patent litigation. It provides, in its entirety, that…
Continue Reading

Wayback Machine — Testimony of Witness with Knowledge of How Internet Archive Works Required for Authentication — Testimony from Creators of Sites as to How They Looked Years Earlier Inadequate to Authenticate Archived Pages

Specht v. Google, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 6318 (7th Cir. April 4, 2014) (affirming the decision excerpted in our blog post of June 25, 2011): During the dot-com boom of the 1990s, Erich Specht founded Android Data Corporation, and…
Continue Reading

RICO Extraterritoriality — RICO Applies Extraterritorially If and Only If Relevant RICO Predicate Applies Extraterritorially — Mere Reference to “Foreign Commerce” Insufficient

European Community v. RJR Nabisco, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 7593 (2d Cir. April 23, 2014): This is the latest installment in litigation brought by the European Community and twenty-six of its member states (collectively "Plaintiffs") against RJR Nabisco, Inc.,…
Continue Reading
Previous252253254255256257258Next

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