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

Complex Lit Blog

Inherent Power Sanctions on Non-Party OK (Purported CEO of Plaintiffs, Authored Bad Faith Affidavits, Failed to Appear when Ordered) — 9th Circuit’s Recklessness-Plus Standard for Bad Faith: Concrete Examples

Indiezone, Inc. v. Rooke, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 25308 (9th Cir. Dec. 14, 2017): MEMORANDUM* *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. In this consolidated appeal, appellants seek review of the district ...
Indiezone, Inc. v. Rooke, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 25308 (9th Cir. Dec. 14, 2017): MEMORANDUM* *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. In this consolidated appeal, appellants…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Sixth Circuit Applies Same Four Factors to Determine Whether Dismissal Is Warranted under Rules 37(b)(2) and 41(b)

Marsh v. Rhodes, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 25354 (6th Cir. Dec. 14, 2017): ORDER DeVonne Marsh, a former Michigan prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 37 and 41. Additionally, he moves to sanction the defendants. This case ha ...
Marsh v. Rhodes, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 25354 (6th Cir. Dec. 14, 2017): ORDER DeVonne Marsh, a former Michigan prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action under Federal Rules of Civil…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — In Criminal Cases, Bad Faith Is Essential to Support Adverse Inference Instruction Even in Circuits Not Requiring Bad Faith in Civil Cases (Dissent Questions Whether This Is True in All Cirs. — This Case Makes It True in 6th Cir.)

United States v. Brasswell, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16144 (6th Cir. Aug. 21, 2017): Defendant Larry Braswell was convicted of one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and was sentenced to 235 months' imprisonment. On appeal, Defendant challenges both his conviction and his sentenc ...
United States v. Brasswell, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16144 (6th Cir. Aug. 21, 2017): Defendant Larry Braswell was convicted of one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and was…
Continue Reading

Texts from Unknown Phone Authenticated by Testimony That Recipient Called Number and Recognized the Voice of the Sender

People v. Mansoori, 2017 IL App (1st) 151832, 2017 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2510 (Ill. Ct. App. Dec. 8, 2017):  [*P1]  Held: The defendant's conviction for harassment through electronic communications is affirmed.  [*P2]  The pro se defendant-appellant
People v. Mansoori, 2017 IL App (1st) 151832, 2017 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2510 (Ill. Ct. App. Dec. 8, 2017):  [*P1]  Held: The defendant's conviction for harassment through electronic communications is affirmed.  [*P2]  The pro se defendant-appellant1 Christopher Mansoori,…
Continue Reading

Disqualification: 10th Cir. Factors—Essential Issue Is Taint of Lawsuit — Sanctions: If Attorney’s Fees Imposed on Client & Counsel, Counsel’s Objecting Just for Itself = Conflict, Resolved by Agreeing to Pay All—Meaning of Abuse of Discretion

U.S. ex rel. Tracy v. Emigration Improvement Dist., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 23650 (10th Cir. Nov. 22, 2017):   *   After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties' request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See < ...
U.S. ex rel. Tracy v. Emigration Improvement Dist., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 23650 (10th Cir. Nov. 22, 2017):   *   After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties' request for a decision on…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Rule 41(b) Dismissal Requires Willful Disobedience of Court Order, Is a Last Resort — No Inherent Power Dismissal without Leave to Amend on Grounds Complaint Is Patently Frivolous (Circuit Split) — Rooker-Feldman Inapplicable to TROs

Smith v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 679 Fed.Appx. 876 (11th Cir. Feb. 13, 2017): Plaintiffs Marvin and Sharon Smith, proceeding pro se,1 appeal the district court’s denial of their motion to remand and the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of their complaint. Reversi ...
Smith v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 679 Fed.Appx. 876 (11th Cir. Feb. 13, 2017): Plaintiffs Marvin and Sharon Smith, proceeding pro se,1 appeal the district court’s denial of their motion to remand and the district court’s dismissal with…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions — Pro Se Not Entitled to Attorney’s Fees Even If a Lawyer — Abuse of Discretion to Preclude Rule 11 Motion Based on Evaluation of Target’s Conduct under Subjective, Rather Than Objective, Standard

Rowe v. Gary, 2017 WL 3082022 (11th Cir. July 20, 2017): *1 Maria Sperando, a lawyer proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s refusal to allow her to file a motion for sanctions against Leonard Rowe, Rowe Entertainment, Inc., Lee King, and Lee King Productions Inc. (collectively, the “plainti ...
Rowe v. Gary, 2017 WL 3082022 (11th Cir. July 20, 2017): *1 Maria Sperando, a lawyer proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s refusal to allow her to file a motion for sanctions against Leonard Rowe, Rowe Entertainment, Inc., …
Continue Reading

Rule 37(d) Sanctions: When Party Ignores Order after Warning Dismissal Could Result, No Abuse of Discretion to Dismiss — Failure to Attend Deposition as Ordered or Pay Prior Sanction — “Naked Claims of Destitution” Not Substantial Jusitification

Lafavors v. Thayer, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12849 (11th Cir. July 18, 2017): Henry LaFavors, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's dismissal, for failure to comply with a court order, of his complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On appeal, LaFavors argues that the district cou ...
Lafavors v. Thayer, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12849 (11th Cir. July 18, 2017): Henry LaFavors, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's dismissal, for failure to comply with a court order, of his complaint brought under…
Continue Reading

Spoliation: Movant Fails to Carry Burden Where Document May Have Been Lost Before the Duty to Preserve Attached — Best Evidence: If Original of Form Contract Innocently Lost, Use of Exemplar as Duplicate OK

Bickoff v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 24579 (9th Cir. Dec. 5, 2017): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Bruce Bickoff appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Well ...
Bickoff v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 24579 (9th Cir. Dec. 5, 2017): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Bruce Bickoff appeals the…
Continue Reading

“Conclusory, Self-Serving Affidavits Are Insufficient to Withstand Motion for SJ” (Good Quote) — Dr.’s Unauthorized Disclosure to Wife of Husband’s 160-Pill Viagra Rx Followed by Divorce ≠ Negligence Claim (No Causation) But = Breach of Confi

Lee v. Park, 2017 WL 6508840 (3d Cir. Dec. 20, 2017): This case originated as a result of the alleged improper disclosure of private medical information. Sang Geoul Lee (“Mr. Lee”) sued his former physician, Won Il Park (“Dr. Park”), asserting New Jersey state law claims of negligence per se (Count I), negligence (Count II), a ...
Lee v. Park, 2017 WL 6508840 (3d Cir. Dec. 20, 2017): This case originated as a result of the alleged improper disclosure of private medical information. Sang Geoul Lee (“Mr. Lee”) sued his former physician, Won Il Park (“Dr. Park”),…
Continue Reading
Previous106107108109110111112Next

Recent Posts

Electronic Spoliation/Rule 37(e): (1) Finding of Recklessness But Neither Gross Negligence Nor Willfulness in Loss of Video Evidence Precludes Rule 37(e)(2)’s Severest Sanctions Because (i) No Intent to Deprive and (ii) Rule 37(e)(2) Displaces District Court’s Power to Invoke Inherent Power to Impose Those Sanctions — (2) Appellate Review = Abuse of Discretion, With The Caveat That Whether The District Court Applied The Correct Legal Standards Is Reviewed De Novo — (3) Inherent Power Is Often Available As An Alternate Source of Sanctioning Power But Can Be Limited by Rule or Statute, Something Which Courts Do Not Lightly Presume — (4) The Text of Rule 37(e)(2), As Confirmed by the Advisory Committee Note, Displaces Inherent Power to Impose the Sanctions Specified in the Rule or Any More Severe Sanctions — (5) “Intent to Deprive” in Rule 37(e)(2) = “The Willful Destruction Of Evidence With The Purpose Of Avoiding Its Discovery By An Adverse Party” — (6) Appellate Standing Conferred by Virtue of Issuance of Sanctions Regardless of Merits Outcome — (7) Value of Advisory Committee Notes in Interpreting Rules Enacted without Change Despite General Reticence to Rely on Legislative History

RICO: (1) Plaintiff Need Not Suffer Injury from Each Predicate Act to Establish Standing, And The Pattern May Include Predicates As to Which No Plaintiff Has Standing — (2) 7 Elements of a Civil RICO Claim (2d Circuit Articulation) Which Must Be Established As to Each Defendant — (3) Requirements of an Association-in-Fact Enterprise — (4) Each Defendant Must Personally Commit 2 or More Predicate Acts — (5) Pattern of Racketeering Activity: Horizontal and Vertical Elements — (6) No Requirement That All Members of a RICO Enterprise Joined at Inception — Can Join Over Time/Others Can Quit — (7) Cannot Charge 2 Predicate Acts Where One Action Violates Two Statutes — (8) A Footnote to Consider for Briefs: “Unless Otherwise Noted, When Quoting Judicial Decisions This Order Accepts All Alterations And Omits All Citations, Footnotes, And Internal Quotation Marks.”

For An Appeal to Be Timely, A Motion for Reconsideration in The District Court (A Rule 59(e) Motion) Must Be Filed, And Not Just Served within 30 Days of The Decision, to Toll The 30-Day Period for Filing An Appeal

There Is No Good-Faith Defense For Issuing An Overly Burdensome Subpoena

Purposes of Rule 37 and Section 1927 Sanctions

While Rule 11 Doesn’t Apply to Appellate Proceedings (Unless It Has Been Incorporated in Local Appellate Rules), Rule 11 Caselaw Is Looked to for Guidance in Interpreting Applicable Sanctions Powers on Appeal

Rule 11 Sanctions & Appellate Review: Abuse of Discretion Standard Applies Unless Sanctions Are Based Solely (Not Just in Part) on Legal Issues, in Which Case Review Is De Novo

Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions for Altering Expert’s 26(a)(2)(B) Report — Without the Expert’s Knowledge or Approval — by Converting It from PDF to Word, Changing Headings and Other Formatting, and Omitting a Page of Relevant Text and Appendices, Even Though Expert Testified That The Overall Substance of the Report Was Unchanged — Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions May Be Reversed If Failure to Comply with Discovery Order Was Due to Misunderstanding or Inability to Comply

Spoliation: Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e) Imposes a Higher Standard — Intent — Than Fourth Circuit Law Previously Applied to Spoliation of Electronically-Stored Information (And Still Does As to Non-ESI) — Willfulness vs. Intent

Inherent Power and § 1927 Sanctions: Removal of counsel from case, referral for disciplinary action, and award of fees and costs for assaulting opposing counsel at deposition — Failure to request hearing waive any right to a hearing — Notice and opportunity to be heard required before sua sponte sanctions imposed, whether under Rule 11, the inherent power of the court or § 1927 — Notice may come from court or opposing counsel — Order imposing sanctions cannot provide notice of sanctions — Nature of bad faith requirement for inherent power sanctions: bad faith to obstruct the judicial process or bring about violation of a court order — Sanctions proceeding need not defer (Younger abstention) to disciplinary proceeding involving the same conduct — Sanctions proceeding doesn’t threaten to interfere with disciplinary proceeding — Why District Court is accorded significant deference in matters concerning attorney’s fees

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

© 2024 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice