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 Limited to What Suffices to Deter Repetition by Offender and Others (Good Quote) — Eleventh Circuit Factors to Be Considered in Determining an Appropriate Sanction

Thomas v. Early Cnty., GA, 518 F. App'x 645 (11th Cir. 2013): "The purpose of Rule 11 sanctions is to reduce frivolous claims, defenses, or motions, and to deter costly meritless maneuvers." Kaplan v. DaimlerChrysler, A.G., 331 F.3d 1251, 1255…
Continue Reading

RICO — Injury Requirement Restricts Broad Reading — “Natural and Foreseeable Consequence” Does Not Satisfy “Substantial Factor” Causation Test of RICO — Raising Argument Initially in Reply Brief on Appeal Waives It

Rock v. BAE Sys., Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 3578 (11th Cir. Feb. 26, 2014): Randel Rock, appearing pro se, appeals the district court's dismissal of his complaints, which alleged violations of the Interstate Stalking Punishment and Prevention Act ("ISPPA")…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Appealability — Cunningham Bars Interlocutory Appeal or Mandamus Review of § 1927 Sanctions — Mandamus Inapt If Direct Review Available Later — Sanctioning Plaintiff in Civil Rights Action Is Extreme — Good Quotes

Howe v. City of Akron, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2300 (6th Cir. Feb. 4, 2014): Plaintiffs appeal an order sanctioning them, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, for abuse of the discovery process. An earlier trial resulted in a verdict…
Continue Reading

Forum Selection Clause — Federal Law Determines Enforceability of Clause, While Law Recited in Choice of Law Clause Determines Interpretation of Clause — Circuit Split

Martinez v. Bloomberg LP, 740 F.3d 211 (2d Cir. 2014): Plaintiff-Appellant Brian Anthony Martinez ("Martinez") appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Furman, J.), dismissing his complaint for improper venue…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court — SLUSA Does Not Extend Federal Jurisdiction to Class Actions Concerning Uncovered Securities That Investors Were Promised Would Be Invested in Covered Securities — Actual or Attempted Ownership Interest in Covered Securities Essential

Chadbourne & Parke, LLP v. Troice, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 1644 (U.S. Feb. 26, 2014): The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (which we shall refer to as the "Litigation Act") forbids the bringing of large securities class actions based …
Continue Reading
Previous258259260261262263264Next

Recent Articles

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

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)

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