Joseph Hage Aaronson

§ 1782: Where Foreign Case Over, Fact Discovery May Permit Reopening Likely Not “For Use” — Foreign View Applicant’s Claims Totally Lack Merit Relevant to “Receptivity” — Can Magistrate Judge Decide 1782s? (See Dissent)

Khrapunov v. Prosyankin, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 22062 (9th Cir. July 24, 2019): 28 U.S.C. § 1782 authorizes, but does not require, federal district courts to assist in the production of evidence for use in a foreign or international tribunal.…

While Magistrate Judges May Not Impose Rule 11 Sanctions in the Second Circuit [& Can Only Issue R&Rs], They May Impose Monetary [& Other Non-Dispositive] Rule 37 Sanctions

Errant Gene Therapeutics, LLC v. Sloan-Kettering Inst. for Cancer Research, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 15860 (2d Cir. May 29, 2019) (unpublished): SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court…

Rule 11 Sanctions: Frivolousness Standard Unmet Because “Claims Were Not Disposed of So Easily As to Make Them Frivolous” (Good Quote)PER CURIAM:

Gatti v. Goodman, 2019 WL 3213887 (11t Cir. July 17, 2019) (unpublished): *1 Appellants Lou Gatti and Twin Palms, Inc., appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Appellees Helen Goodman, Cliff Goodman, and Twin Palms Resort in this…

§ 1782 — Tag Service = “Found” — Signatory to Hague Evidence Convention Likely Receptive to U.S. Discovery — When Is Action “Within Reasonable Contemplation”? — Discovery from Anticipated Defendant Inappropriate

Sandra Holding v. Fawzi, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116920 (D. Mass. July 15, 2019): I. Introduction The petitioner, Sandra Holding Ltd. (Sandra Holding), seeks permission to obtain discovery in the United States for use in a foreign proceeding pursuant to…

Sanctions: Default Judgment for Defendant’s Failure to Comply with Court-Ordered Discovery — Disobedience “Not Shown to Be Outside Control of Litigant” = Willfulness, Bad Faith or Fault (Good Quote)

Apriori Techs. v. Broquard, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 21963 (9th Cir. July 23, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM* Charles Jerome Broquard appeals pro se from the district court's default judgment and permanent injunction in plaintiff's diversity action alleging defamation, intentional interference …

Rule 12(b)(1) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing Is a Facial Attack on Complaint and Considered under Same Standard as Rule 12(b)(6) Motion

Willekes v. Serengeti Trading Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 22214, 2019 WL 3335554 (3d Cir. July 25, 2019) (unpublished): These appeals arise from the District Court’s dismissal of a suit filed by appellants George, Mark, and Robert Willekes, shareholders …

§ 1782 — Person “Found” within District Only If Presence Satisfies Due Process As Articulated in Supreme Court’s Personal Jurisdiction Case Law (Goodyear, Daimler, et al.)

In re Aso, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120873 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2019): MEMORANDUM ORDER JAMES L. COTT, United States Magistrate Judge. On April 12, 2019, Petitioner applied for an order to conduct discovery for use in foreign proceedings pursuant…

RICO Conspiracy Claim Fails If Substantive Violation Inadequately Alleged

Manos v. MTC Fin’l, Inc., 2019 WL 3225991 (9th Cir. July 17, 2019) (unpublished): MEMORANDUM** *1 John Manos, Tara Borrelli, and Jessie Manos appeal from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims arising…

Texts on Decedent’s Facebook Page Authenticated by Other Person’s Screen Name, Contents, Timing of Messages and Decedent’s Actions Consistent with Them

State v. Green, 2019 S.C. App. LEXIS 55 (S.C. Ct. App. June 26, 2019): Convicted by a jury of murder and desecration of human remains, Fabian Lamichael R. Green appeals, challenging the trial court's admission of a series of direct …

Sanctions—Even Egregious Litigation Abuse Doesn’t Subject Non-Party (Corp. Officer) to Personal Liability for Amount of Claim against Party (Corp.) — Must Be Punished under Appropriate Sanctions Power

The plaintiff in this case, Life Technologies Corp., filed a complaint against another corporation of the same name (the defendant corporation, or the defendant), alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A). The…

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

§ 1782: Where Foreign Case Over, Fact Discovery May Permit Reopening Likely Not “For Use” — Foreign View Applicant’s Claims Totally Lack Merit Relevant to “Receptivity” — Can Magistrate Judge Decide 1782s? (See Dissent)

While Magistrate Judges May Not Impose Rule 11 Sanctions in the Second Circuit [& Can Only Issue R&Rs], They May Impose Monetary [& Other Non-Dispositive] Rule 37 Sanctions

Rule 11 Sanctions: Frivolousness Standard Unmet Because “Claims Were Not Disposed of So Easily As to Make Them Frivolous” (Good Quote)PER CURIAM:

§ 1782 — Tag Service = “Found” — Signatory to Hague Evidence Convention Likely Receptive to U.S. Discovery — When Is Action “Within Reasonable Contemplation”? — Discovery from Anticipated Defendant Inappropriate

Sanctions: Default Judgment for Defendant’s Failure to Comply with Court-Ordered Discovery — Disobedience “Not Shown to Be Outside Control of Litigant” = Willfulness, Bad Faith or Fault (Good Quote)

Rule 12(b)(1) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing Is a Facial Attack on Complaint and Considered under Same Standard as Rule 12(b)(6) Motion

§ 1782 — Person “Found” within District Only If Presence Satisfies Due Process As Articulated in Supreme Court’s Personal Jurisdiction Case Law (Goodyear, Daimler, et al.)

RICO Conspiracy Claim Fails If Substantive Violation Inadequately Alleged

Texts on Decedent’s Facebook Page Authenticated by Other Person’s Screen Name, Contents, Timing of Messages and Decedent’s Actions Consistent with Them

Sanctions—Even Egregious Litigation Abuse Doesn’t Subject Non-Party (Corp. Officer) to Personal Liability for Amount of Claim against Party (Corp.) — Must Be Punished under Appropriate Sanctions Power

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

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

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 Office