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

RICO — Corporate Defendant Is Not Distinct from Wholly-Owned Subsidiary Where Latter Is the Alleged Enterprise, Absent Allegations of Functional Separation between the Two

ISystems v. Spark Networks, Ltd., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6197 (5th Cir. Mar. 21, 2012): Spark Networks, the owner of the “jdate.com” web domain, won the rights to ISystems’s “jdate.net” domain name in arbitration. ISystems then brought suit against Spark…
Continue Reading

Spoliation by Defendant Does Not Preclude Summary Judgment for Defendant Where Subject Matter of Spoliated Evidence Is Conceded, Notwithstanding Grant of Adverse Inference Sanction

Canton v. Kmart Corp., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6372 (3d Cir. Mar. 29, 2012): Appellant Patrice Canton (“Canton”) appeals the District Court’s February 12, 2010 Order granting Appellee’s (“Kmart”) motion for summary judgment. Canton filed a personal injury action against…
Continue Reading

Personal Jurisdiction — Circuit Split on the Significance of Foreseeability that a Product Will Reach a State — Only Concurrence Binding when Supreme Court Issues Plurality Opinion

Graham v. Hamilton, , 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35322 (W.D. La. Mar. 15, 2012): In Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of California, a fractured Court addressed minimum contacts. There, Justice O’Conn[o]r, writing for four justices, determined that foreseeability…
Continue Reading

2010 Expert Discovery Amendments Narrow the Definition of a “Retained or Specially Employed” Expert without Redefining It — New Disclosures for Unretained Experts Encourage Literal Interpretation

Downey v. Bob’s Discount Furniture Holdings, Inc., 633 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2011): In 2005, the plaintiffs, Yvette Downey and her daughter, Ashley Celester, were living in Randolph, Massachusetts. Early that year they began to experience skin irritation, which they…
Continue Reading
Previous326327328329330331332Next

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