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 37(b) Default Upheld for Disregard of Oral Discovery Order Not Noticed, Opposed or Formally Heard — Five-Factor Ninth Circuit Test for Default Sanction — Second Judge on Case May Reconsider Orders of First — 16(f) Sanctions — Good Quotes

From Dreith v. Nu Image, Inc., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14686 (9th Cir. July 19, 2011): The Defendants below, Appellants here, engaged in discovery misconduct that was sufficiently egregious to cause the district court to enter an order of default…
Continue Reading

Court Retains CAFA Jurisdiction over All Claims after Denying Class Certification and Even after Severance Produces Multiple New Cases over Which No Independent Jurisdiction Exists

From Helm v. Alderwoods Grp., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77370 (N.D. Cal. July 18, 2011): The subject of this litigation is a wage and hour dispute brought by current and former employees of Alderwoods Group, Inc. (“Alderwoods”), a provider…
Continue Reading

National Security Council and Others Who Advise the President Are Not Subject to FOIA — Test for Determining Exempt Status — When Equitable Estoppel May be Asserted against the Federal Government

From Electronic Privacy Information Center v. National Security Agency, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72751 (D.D.C. July 7, 2011): The text of FOIA makes clear that the statute applies to “agenc[ies]” only. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a) (“Each agency shall make…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court on Anti-Injunction Act — Federal Denial of Class Certification Not Binding on State Court that Applies Different Standards — Absent Class Members Not Bound by Decisions in Putative (Not Certified) Class Action — Good Quotes

From Smith v. Bayer Corp., 180 L. Ed. 2d 341 (2011): [T]he “relitigation exception” to the Anti-Injunction Act … permits a federal court to enjoin a state proceeding only in rare cases, when necessary to “protect or effectuate [the federal…
Continue Reading

No Mandamus Review of Order Compelling Arbitration Even If Erroneous Because Claimants Are Exempt from Arbitrating under FAA — Existence of Exemption Is Not an Issue of Arbitrability — Error on Issue of First Impression Not “Clear”

From In re Van Dusen, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 15398 (9th Cir. July 27, 2011): This matter comes before us on petition for a writ of mandamus. Petitioners argue that the District Court erred by refusing to resolve their claim…
Continue Reading

Conclusory Finding of Bad Faith Cannot Sustain Inherent Power Sanction — § 105(a) of Bankruptcy Code Codifies Inherent Power — Sins of Lawyer Not Visited on Client, Whose Bad Faith Must Separately be Found — Good Quotes

From DeLauro v. Porto (In re Porto), 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 13941 (11th Cir. July 8, 2011): “While bad faith is the key to unlocking the court’s inherent power, a court must do more than conclude that a party acted…
Continue Reading
Previous351352353354355356357Next

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