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

Securities — Supreme Court to Revisit Fraud on the Market and Consider Whether Defendant May Rebut Presumption of Reliance at Class Certification by Showing That the Alleged Misrepresentation Did Not Distort the Stock Price

Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., No. 13-317 (U.S. Nov. 15, 2013) (available at http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/13-317.htm), granting certiorari: QUESTIONS PRESENTED: 1. Whether this Court should overrule or substantially modify the holding of Basic Inc. v. Levinson, 485 U.S.…
Continue Reading

Where Counsel Files Multiple Suits, Each <100 Plaintiffs, and Doesn't Propose Joint Trial, CAFA Removal Improper — Maybe OK If State Court Sua Sponte Orders Joint Trial — Good Quote re Stretching Opinion’s Reasoning Beyond Its Breaking Point

Scimone v. Carnival Corp., 720 F.3d 876 (11th Cir. 2013): In 2012, one of Appellants' cruise ships, the Costa Concordia, ran aground off the coast of Italy. In the wake of the accident, many of the Costa Concordia's passengers sued…
Continue Reading

Legal Malpractice — Judicial Proceedings Privilege Protects Lawyers from Liability for Statements Made in and Pertinent to Litigation — Applies to All Causes of Action — Not Limited to Defamation Claims

Hadar v. Pierce, 2013 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7376 (1st Dept. Nov. 12, 2013): The first through fourth causes of action are based on the purportedly false statements made in the complaint in a prior Supreme Court action and the …
Continue Reading

The Statute of Limitations for a Criminal Legal Malpractice or Malicious Prosecution Plaintiff Commences Only after All Charges Have Been Disposed of in His or Her Favor — No Claim Lies While Charges Pending

Kanciper v. Lato, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159725 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 7, 2013): [T]he Plaintiff's state law causes of actions accrue when the entire underlying action or proceeding is dismissed. Here, because the underlying indictment remained pending until the Appellate Division…
Continue Reading

Securities — § 15(a)(1) of ’34 Act Affords Private Right of Action — Rescission Available under § 29(b) to Stranger to Contract — Privity Inferrable from Cross-References to Other Contracts to Which Plaintiff Was Party

Landegger v. Cohen, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159734 (D. Colo. Nov. 7, 2013): The crux of Plaintiff's claim is predicated on the unregistered broker status of Defendants Cohen and Young, respectively. Because of this status, Plaintiff contends that the securities'…
Continue Reading

Goals of Spoliation Sanctions — Court of Appeals Has Discretion to Entertain Arguments on Appeal Not Raised below (Doctrine of Forfeiture) — Is Terminating Excessive If Case Would’ve Been Resolved on Purely Legal Grounds?

Gutman v. Klein, 515 F. App’x 8 (2d Cir. 2013): Defendants-Appellants Zalman Klein ("Klein"), Dina Klein, A to Z Holding Corporation ("Holding"), A to Z Capital Corporation ("Capital"), and Washington Greene Associates ("WGA") (collectively, "defendants") appeal from two judgments (1)…
Continue Reading

RICO — Shareholder and Guarantor Lack Standing to Sue for Injuries Derivative of Corporation’s — Mareva-Like Injunction Potentially OK under State Law — Assignment of Claims Must Antedate Inception of Suit to Confer Standing

Niemi v. Lasshofer, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 18589 (10th Cir. Sept. 6, 2013): An unconventional real estate financing scheme presents us with some unconventional legal questions. Questions ranging from whether an Austrian financier should be denied access to the American…
Continue Reading
Previous270271272273274275276Next

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