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

R. 37 Dismissal Sanction: Fault=Unreasonable Conduct > “Mere Mistake or Slight Error in Judgment” — No Motion to Compel OK If Actual Notice of Risk Given by Adversary — Proportional Sanction ≠ Least — Eventual Compliance Not Nec’ly Enough

Mojapelo v. Nat’l RR Passenger Corp., 2019 WL 193126 (7th Cir. Jan. 15, 2019): ORDER *1 Charles Mojapelo injured his leg while disembarking from a train operated by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak). He sued Amtrak for compensatory and…
Continue Reading

Common Law Immunity Protects State & Local Officials from Federal Civil Claims for Acts Legislative in Form and Substance, Unless Abrogated by Statute — Defeats RICO Claim — Plaintiffs Didn’t Argue RICO Abrogates Immunity (Open Issue)

NRP Holdings LLC v. City of Buffalo, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 4866, 2019 WL 692529 (2d Cir. Feb. 20, 2019): We confront here primarily a question of legislative immunity raised by a [*3]  mayor's inaction in the face of…
Continue Reading

Mere Failure to Recite That a Declaration or Affidavit Is Based on Personal Knowledge Doesn’t Render Contents Hearsay If It Is Clear from the Circumstances (Contents, Other Evidence) That It Was

Venezia v. E. Revenue, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21501 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 11, 2019): : Footnote 2: Plaintiff filed an Objection to Defendant's Submissions    [ECF No. 33 & 34] urging this Court to disregard Mr. Griffin's Declaration…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court: Class Actions — 23(f)’s 14-Day Period Not Subject to Equitable Tolling — Mandatory Claims-Processing Rules Unalterable If Diligently Asserted — Timely Reconsideration Motion Affects Start Date

Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, 2019 U.S. LEXIS 1593 (U.S. Feb. 26, 2019): To take an immediate appeal from a federal district court’s order granting or denying class certification, a party must first seek permission from the relevant court of …
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions: Inconsistencies in Witness Testimony, Alone, Are Insufficient to Find Bad Faith — Fact Witness Relied on Lawyer to Draft Discovery Responses for Witness’s Approval Not Sanctionable

Strang v. Ga., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 36707 (11th Cir. Dec. 31, 2018) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Kathleen Strang, a former assistant city attorney in Albany, Georgia, brings a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming that her First Amendment…
Continue Reading

Texts: Authentication of Cell Data from Ownership, Admission Participated in Part of Chat — No Need to “Negate All Other Possibilities Inconsistent with Authenticity” — Record As “Muddle of Statements Not Phrased As Objections” (Good Quotes)

Snow v. State, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 342 (Tex. Ct. App. Jan. 17, 2019): A jury convicted Cristi Jeanette Snow of two counts of sexual performance of a child under age fourteen. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 43.25(b),…
Continue Reading

Denial of Rule 11 Sanctions in Case 1 Doesn’t Establish It Was Not “Objectively Baseless” within Noerr-Pennington Sham Exception — Sxs Discretionary—Non Coextensive Factors May Have Been Considered—No Issue Preclusion

Ni-Q, LLC v. Prolacta Bioscience, Inc., 2019 WL 637703 (D. Or. Feb. 14, 2019): *1 In this patent action, the Court previously granted partial summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff Ni-Q, LLC (“Ni-Q”), finding that the asserted claims of the …
Continue Reading
Previous73747576777879Next

Recent Articles

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)

Supreme Court: Relief under Rule 60(b)(6) Requires Extraordinary Circumstances Even If It Is Invoked to Allow Amendment of The Complaint–Rule 15’s Liberal Approach to Amendment Does Not Change That (Reversing Second Circuit)

FRAP 38 Sanctions — Eleventh Circuit Generally Does Not Impose FRAP 38 Sanctions on Pro Se Litigants, But May Do So If They Have Persisted Despite Judicial Warnings of Frivolousness

Inherent Power Sanctions: No Dismissal with Prejudice If Lesser Sanctions Will Suffice — The Liberal Pleading Standard of Swierkiewicz “Is Still Good Law”

Supreme Court: (1) Fraudulent Inducement Theory of Mail Fraud: Statute Violated If Victim Is Tricked into Parting with Money Or Property, Even If Victim Suffers No Pecuniary Loss — (2) “A Fraud Is Complete When The Defendant Has Induced The Deprivation Of Money Or Property Under Materially False Pretenses” — (3) The Old Soil Principle of Statutory Construction Applies Only to the Extent That a Common-Law Term Has Accumulated a Settled Meaning — (4) Rescission for Fraud Does Not Require Economic Loss; Sufficient If Property of A Different Character Or Condition Provided — i.e, If Victim Tricked into A Bargain Materially Different from The One Promised — (5) “At The Right Level Of Specificity, Anything Can Be Described As ‘Unique’ Or ‘Different From’ Something Else” (Good Quote) — (6) “Materiality Look[s] To The Effect On The Likely Or Actual Behavior Of The Recipient Of The Alleged Misrepresentation” (Good Quote)

Statements in Briefs As Judicial Admissions

Supreme Court: TRO As Appealable Order — And District Court Inaction As Tantamount to Refusing An Injunction And Thus Appealable

“Slow-Playing Discovery” in Response to Court Order, Prejudicing Opponent, Violates Rule 37(b)(2)(A)

RICO Pattern: No Closed-Ended Continuity If Racketeering Activity Lasted Less Than One Year (11th Circuit) — Conspiracy Allegations Governed by Rule 8(a), Not 9(b) — Two Paths to Establishing A RICO Conspiracy: Agreement to Objective Or to Commit 2 Predicate Acts — Plaintiff Need Not Show Reliance When The Predicate Acts Are Wire Fraud — In Dicta, 11th Circuit Intimates That Even If The Primary RICO Violation Allegations Fail, The RICO Conspiracy Allegations Might Survive, But Is Probably Talking About A Conspiracy to Commit The Predicate Acts

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