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

Does an Unaccepted Settlement Offer That Satisfies Plaintiff’s Entire Demand (Not Just What Defendant Feels Case Is Worth) Render Case Moot? — Circuit Split — Importance of Justice Kagan’s Dissent in Genesis Healthcare

Scott v. Westlake Servs. LLC, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 1335 (7th Cir. Jan. 23, 2014): Under this circuit's case law, an unaccepted settlement offer can render the plaintiff's case moot if it gives the plaintiff everything she requested. Damasco v.…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Different Review Standards Applied by District and Appeals Courts to Magistrate Judge-Issued Sanctions — Inherent Power Sanctions Are Discretionary Even If Bad Faith Found — Importance of Deference When No Transcript Exists

Murray v. City of Columbus, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 17708 (6th Cir. Aug. 23, 2013): Murray was a police lieutenant for the City of Columbus. In September 2007, Mitchell Brown, Columbus's Director of Public Safety, filed a complaint with Murray's…
Continue Reading

FAA — Where Stay of Arbitration Denied in Lawsuit Involving Not Only Parties to Foreign Arbitration But Also Additional Party, Stay of Discovery Appealable under § 16 — Mandatory Statutory Stay of “Trial” Includes Discovery

GEA Grp. AG v. Flex-N-Gate Corp., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 573 (7th Cir. Jan. 10, 2014): Before us is an appeal by GEA Group AG from an order by the district judge partially lifting a stay of discovery in a…
Continue Reading

Experts — “Self-Executing” Sanction of Exclusion for Failure to Supply Report Compliant with Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and Failure to Supplement Even When Undisclosed Methodology Was Attacked Pretrial

Rembrandt Vision Technologies, L.P. v. Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 16283 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 7, 2013): We agree with JJVC that the court correctly granted judgment as a matter of law. The district court did…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Circuit Split as to Whether § 1927 Requires Subjective, as Opposed to Objective, Bad Faith — Lack of Hearing OK Where Misconduct in Writing — No Notice That Counsel Was Target Harmless Where No Prejudice Shown on Appeal

Tate v. Ancell, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 963 (7th Cir. Jan. 17, 2014): Edgar Tate sued the state agency for which he works along with one of the agency's private contractors, asserting that they joined forces in a conspiracy (thus …
Continue Reading

International Service of Process — Compliance with Hague Service Convention Is Mandatory — Is Service by International Mail Sufficient? — Circuit Split

Ackourey v. Noblehouse Custom Tailors, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163535 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 15, 2013): Plaintiff Richard J. Ackourey, Jr. resides in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. (Complaint, Doc. No. 1 at ¶ 3). His corporation, Graphic Styles/Styles International, LLC, is located…
Continue Reading

Rule 37(c)(1) Sanctions — Damages Evidence Excluded for Failure to Include Computation in Either Initial Disclosures or Expert Report — No Excuse That Recalculation Would Have Been Necessary Once Dispute over Methodology Resolved

City of Rome v. Hotels.com, LP, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24745 (11th Cir. Dec. 13, 2013): Plaintiff City of Rome, on behalf of the certified class of over 250 cities and counties throughout Georgia ("the Localities"), appeals both the district …
Continue Reading
Previous262263264265266267268Next

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