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

A Supplemental Complaint Filed Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d), Which Adds Facts Not in Existence at the Time of Original Filing, May Be Used to Correct Substantive Defects in Original, Including Lack of Standing

St. Bernard Parish Gov't v. United States, 2019 U.S. Claims LEXIS 686 (Court of Federal Claims June 20, 2019): BACKGROUND On April 4, 2019, the court issued an Opinion in the above-captioned case denying defendant's motion to dismiss. See St. …
Continue Reading

Daubert — Expert Testimony That Location of Warning Labels on Jet Ski Were Not Sufficiently Visible Properly Excluded Absent Any Methodology — Opinion Was “At Best, An Educated Guess” (Good Quote)

Ruggiero v. Yamaha Motor Corp., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18143 (3d Cir. June 17, 2019) (unpublished): After suffering a severe injury while riding a personal watercraft (PWC), Plaintiff Angela Ruggierio sued the PWC's wholesaler, Defendant Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A., alleging…
Continue Reading

Erie Doctrine: State Trial Court Rulings Provide Guidance But Are Not Controlling Unless They Are Treated As Precedents within the State — [Generally] They Are “At Most Persuasive, But … Not Binding on a Federal Court”

Amaral Enters. Llc v. Gian, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101269 (D. Mass. June 18, 2019): Footnote 6.  When a federal trial court sits in diversity, "[s]tate trial court rulings provide guidance but are not controlling unless they are treated as …
Continue Reading

Tangible Spoliation: Negligence Enough for Adverse Inference in 2d Cir. — RR Not Sanctioned for Altering Scene 3 Years Post-Accident (Passage of Time, Conflicting Safety Duty)—Expert Testimony Out Where Counsel Misled Adversary as to Gist (37(c)(1))

Colon v. Metro N. Commuter R.R. Co., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18313 (2d Cir. June 19, 2019): Plaintiffs-Appellants Milton Omar Colon and Arlene Davis (collectively, "Plaintiffs") appeal from the judgment entered on October 19, 2017 by the United States District…
Continue Reading

Res Judicata: Prior Judgment Barring Later RICO Claim against Client Also Bars It against Client’s Counsel (Privity) — While Pro Se Pleadings Liberally Construed, Failure to Make Any Argument Waives Claimed Error

Rivas v. Bank of New York Mellon, 2019 WL 2419484 (11th Cir. June 10, 2019) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: *1 Armando Rivas, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his amended complaint alleging that the defendants—entities in the banking…
Continue Reading

R. 37/16(f) Sanctions for Violating Protective Order by Reading Confidential Info Aloud in Court: Can’t Seek Fees for Sxs Issue from Later Fee App, Defense Fees Deducted from Any Award; Contingent Bar of Counsel from Arguing Again

In re Apple Device Performance Litig., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100322 (N.D. Cal. June 14, 2019): ORDER RE MOTION FOR SANCTIONS Re: Dkt. No. 313 The Court expressed its disappointment with the parties, and with Mr. Cotchett and Mr.…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution Animates Rule 41 — Factors (4th Cir.) ≠ “Rigid Test” — Clients Participated in Violations of Rules & Orders — Need to Alert District Court of Justifications, Else No Abuse of Discretion

Attkisson v. Holder, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 17882 (4th Cir. May 17, 2019, Amended June 10, 2019): Plaintiffs Sharyl Thompson Attkisson, James Howard Attkisson, [*2]  and Sarah Judith Starr Attkisson appeal from the dismissal with prejudice of their claims …
Continue Reading

Patent-Agent (PA)-Client Privilege Is Narrower Than Attorney-Client, Coextensive with Rights of PAs to Practice before USPTO, Defined by USPTO Regs: Services Nec’y to Prep /Prosecution of Patent Applications

Luv N' Care v. Williams Intellectual Prop., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98960 (D. Colo. June 12, 2019): This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Williams Intellectual Property's Compliance with Subpoena and for Expedited Briefing [#1]…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions: No Failure to Mitigate Fees Shown Where Warning Letters Ignored — Time Spent Reviewing Social Media Posts OK — Inability to Pay May Be Offset by Deterrence — No R. 11 Fees for Time Spent on Appeal

Horen v. Board of Educ. of City of Toledo Public Sch. Dist., 2016 WL 11599934 (6th Cir. Mar. 25, 2016): *1 Glenn Horen, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s imposition of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 sanctions against…
Continue Reading
Previous63646566676869Next

Recent Articles

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 Propoerty 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?

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

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