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

Work Product Protection Can Be Waived by Oral Statements — Here, Public Statements — Sufficiently Specific to Be Tantamount to Public Disclosure of the Contents of the Protected Material [Privilege]

N.Y. Times Co. v. United States DOJ, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 29198 (2d Cir. Sept. 27, 2019): Plaintiffs-appellees The New York Times and reporter Charlie Savage (collectively "The Times") seek access under the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") to five …
Continue Reading

Common Interest Doctrine Requires That Shared Interest Be (1) Identical, Not Similar, and (2) Legal, Not Solely Commercial — Proponent of Attorney-Client Privilege Bears Burden of Proving Non-Waiver

D.M. v. Wesley Med. Ctr. LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160886 (D. Kan. Sept. 19, 2019); MEMORANDUM & ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL Now before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (Doc. 365), seeking production by non-party CarePoint, …
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege: Parents’ Presence at Adult Child’s Consultation with Counsel Destroys Privilege — 3d Party’s Presence, Objectively Viewed, Must Be Reasonably Necessary, Or Another Exception Must Apply

Fox v. Alfini, 2018 CO 94, 432 P.3d 596 (Colo. 2018):  [**598]  en banc  [*P1]  In this original proceeding pursuant to C.A.R. 21, we review the district court's order compelling production of a recording of petitioner Kayla Fox's …
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege: Employer As ERISA Fiduciary Can’t Assert Privilege against Beneficiaries on Matters of Plan Administration But Can As to Advice to Protect Self — Confidential Drafts of Disclosure Documents Privileged

Baird v. Blackrock Institutional Trust Co., N.A., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163615 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2019): On March 6, 2019, the parties filed a joint discovery letter regarding Defendants' discovery log, in which Plaintiffs sought the production of thirty-three…
Continue Reading

Civil Contempt Appealable Only When Unconditional, Sanction Entered — Issue Is Compliance, Not Subjective Intent — Individuals Controlling Corp. Liable for Corp.’s Violation — Court Must Enter Findings, Conclusions (5th/11th Cirs.)

PlayNation Play Sys. v. Velex Corp., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 28810 (11th Cir. Sept. 24, 2019): PlayNation Play Systems, Inc., a company that makes and sells children's playground equipment, won a trademark infringement verdict against Velex Corporation. This is the …
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege — Waiver — Advice of Counsel Defense — Voluntary Production of Documents Reflecting In-House Counsel’s Advice Waives Subject Matter, Requires Production of Outside Counsel’s Advice (Fed.R.Evid. 502(a))

Stolarik v. New York Times Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160994 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 20, 2019): Plaintiff Robert Stolarik — a photographer who formerly worked for the New York Times (the "Times") — brings this action against the Times and Michele…
Continue Reading

Daubert: Conclusion That X Is Prima Facie a Cause Of Y ≠ A Conclusion X Caused Y — Expert Must Apply The Methods Of His Or Her Discipline for Expert to Be Qualified to Testify As to Outcome

In re Nat'l Prescription Opiate Litig., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146608 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 28, 2019): OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO EXCLUDE MARKETING CAUSATION OPINIONS OF SCHUMACHER, LEMBKE, AND KEYES Before the Court is Defendants' Motion…
Continue Reading
Previous53545556575859Next

Recent Articles

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)

Rule 37(d) Sanctions — For Failure to Serve Answers, Objections, Or Written Response to Discovery Requests — Are Not Limited to Intentional Misconduct; Even Innocent Mistakes May Be Covered

Sanctions: (1) Rule 11 Does Not Apply to Litigation Papers Initially Filed in State Court — Only Reaffirmance in Federal Court Post-Removal Is Subject to Sanction — (2) “The Fact That A Legal Theory Is A Long-Shot Does Not Necessarily Mean It Is Sanctionable” (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