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

Court Lacks Inherent Power (IHP) to Bar Retrial after 2 Hung Juries Where No Prej’l Gov’t Misconduct — Exercise of IHP Must Be Proportionate & Not Contrary to Rule or Stat.—Can’t Create Rule in Conflict with Fed. Rules

United States v. Wright, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 1541 (3d Cir. Jan. 17, 2019): The District Court barred a retrial of and dismissed the indictment against Defendant Raymont Wright with prejudice after two juries failed to reach a verdict. …
Continue Reading

Getting Dismissal with Prej. by Settling ≠ “Prevailing Party” — Citing Cases w/o Settlement = “Willful Obtuseness” & Objective Bad Faith under 1927 — Sua Sponte Despite 11(c)(5)(B) Limits on Post-Jmt. $ Sua Sponte (Dicta; Waived)

Bell v. Vacuforce, LLC, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32196 (7th Cir. Nov. 14, 2018): Richard Bell brought a copyright infringement lawsuit against Vacuforce, LLC, accusing it of publishing his photograph of the Indianapolis skyline on its website without a …
Continue Reading

Witness’s Denial (& Usually Admission & Maybe Inability to Recall) S/he Sent Texts Opens Door under R. 613(b) to Evidence of Texts Showing Bias under R. 608(b) — Questions Eliciting Admissible Answers ≠ Hearsay

United States v. Fernandez, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3463 (7th Cir. Feb. 4, 2019): A jury convicted Luis Fernandez of being a felon in possession of a firearm, see 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Fernandez appeals his conviction, contending that…
Continue Reading

Video Spoliation — Negligent Loss / Destruction Insufficient, Willfulness Required (4th Cir. Common Law) — Defendant’s Mistaken Belief Video Preserved Precludes Willfulness, Sanctions — Same Result under Rule 37(e) (Adopted During Case)

Boone v. Everett, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3818, 2019 WL 493681 (4th Cir. Feb. 7, 2019) (unpublished): Wally Boone, a Virginia inmate, appeals the denial of his motion for sanctions on the basis of spoliation against former Virginia correctional officer …
Continue Reading

RICO: Married Couple May = Associated-in-Fact Enterprise — No Heightened Structure Requirement — “Marriage Certificate Doesn’t Transform Mail/Wire Fraud Into Ordinary Household Management” (Good Quotes)

Al-Rayes v. Willingham, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3565 (11th Cir. Feb. 5, 2019): The creditors in this case claim that a husband and wife worked together to commit multiple acts of mail and wire fraud over several years for …
Continue Reading

Rule 408 Offer of Settlement: While a Dispute Is Required, “Actual … Difference of Opinion” Enough — Communication Needn’t “Expressly & Outwardly Dispute Amount or Validity of Claim” — Tone & Context May Show Dispute Exists

Savy Surfers v. Wings of Minot ND LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14548 (D. N.D. Jan. 30, 2019): Before the Court is a motion in limine regarding the admissibility of an email filed by the Plaintiff, Savy Surfers, Inc.…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Expert Witness Lacks Standing to Appeal the Striking of His or Her Testimony — Expert Reports: Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) Doesn’t Require Disclosure of Communications Irrelevant to Expert’s Opinion

A.H. Lundberg Assocs. v. Tsi, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3562, 2019 WL 449695 (9th Cir. Feb. 5, 2019): MEMORANDUM* Expert witness Dr. Richard J. Martin ("Martin") and Martin Thermal Engineering, Inc. appeal the district court's imposition of …
Continue Reading

No Inherent Power (IHP) to Bar Retrial after 2 Hung Juries Where No Gov’t Misconduct Prejudicing Def. — Exercise of IHP Must Be Reasonable Response to Problem & Can’t Be Contrary to Rule, Stat—Can’t Use IHP to Create Rule in Conflict with Fed Rules

United States v. Wright, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 1541 (3d Cir. Jan. 17, 2019): The District Court barred a retrial of and dismissed the indictment against Defendant Raymont Wright with prejudice after two juries failed to reach a verdict. …
Continue Reading
Previous76777879808182Next

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