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

Blog Admissibility & Authentication — Use of 28 U.S.C. § 1782 for Document Discovery into Identity of Blogger and Testimony Sufficient to Authenticate Blog Posts

In re Ex Parte Application of Darmon, 2017 WL 3283969 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2017): ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER TO OBTAIN DISCOVERY FOR USE IN FOREIGN PROCEEDINGS Re: Dkt. No. 1 *1 Applicant Raphael Darmon (“Darmon”) filed an ex parte application seeking permission to issue a ...
In re Ex Parte Application of Darmon, 2017 WL 3283969 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2017): ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER TO OBTAIN DISCOVERY FOR USE IN FOREIGN PROCEEDINGS Re: Dkt. No. 1 *1 Applicant Raphael Darmon (“Darmon”) filed…
Continue Reading

RICO Extraterritoriality: Injury to Tangible Property, Including Cash in Bank & Bearer Shares of Foreign Entity in Safety Deposit Box, Is Domestic If Located in US, Even If Plaintiff Lives Abroad — Theft of Shares vs. Decline in Value

Bascuñán v. Elsaca, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 21519 (2d Cir. Oct. 30, 2017): The question presented in this appeal is whether the plaintiffs have plausibly alleged "a domestic injury ...
Bascuñán v. Elsaca, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 21519 (2d Cir. Oct. 30, 2017): The question presented in this appeal is whether the plaintiffs have plausibly alleged "a domestic injury" to their business or property within the meaning of Section …
Continue Reading

Securities — Does LIFO or FIFO Apply in the Section 11 Traceability Context? — Since LIFO Is Used to Calculate Losses, Court Use It to Determine Traceability (First Impression)

In re LendingClub Secs. Litig.. 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174208 (N.D. Cal.  )ct. 20, 2017): ORDER RE CLASS CERTIFICATION INTRODUCTION In this PSLRA ...
In re LendingClub Secs. Litig.. 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174208 (N.D. Cal.  )ct. 20, 2017): ORDER RE CLASS CERTIFICATION INTRODUCTION In this PSLRA action, lead plaintiff moves for class certification and to enjoin a parallel state action. Class representatives…
Continue Reading

Avoidance of Rule 11 Sanctions by Withdrawing Complaint During Safe Harbor Period Does Not Insulate Party from Exceptional Case Fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 (Patent Cases)

Rothschild Connected Devices Innovations, LLC v. Guardian Protection Servs., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9876 (Fed. Cir. June 5, 2017): Appellant ADS Security, L.P. ("ADS") appeals the opinion and order of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas ("District Court") denying ADS's request for ...
Rothschild Connected Devices Innovations, LLC v. Guardian Protection Servs., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9876 (Fed. Cir. June 5, 2017): Appellant ADS Security, L.P. ("ADS") appeals the opinion and order of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of…
Continue Reading

Rule 37(c) Exclusion of Evidence Not Disclosed until SJ — If Exclusion = Dismissal, Willfulness Needed— Affidavit Based on Personal Knowledge “Or Believed to Be True” Based on Records & Discussions Does Not Create a Fact Questiion at SJ

BWP Media USA Inc. v. Urbanity, LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10784 (9th Cir. June 19, 2017): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Plaintiff-appellant BWP Media USA Inc. (BWP) appeals the district court's order excluding evidence as ...
BWP Media USA Inc. v. Urbanity, LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10784 (9th Cir. June 19, 2017): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Plaintiff-appellant BWP Media …
Continue Reading

§ 1927 Sanctions OK for “Objective Bad Faith” — Appellate Jurisdiction Exists for Dismissal without Prejudice Based on Arbitration Clause or Forum Non Conveniens Because It Is Final as to Federal Court, as Opposed to the Other Forum

Hunt v. Moore Bros., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11607 (7th Cir. June 29, 2017): James Hunt worked as a truck driver in Nebraska. On July 1, 2010, he signed an Independent Contractor Operating Agreement with Moore Brothers, a small company located in Norfolk, Nebraska. Three years later, Hunt and Moore renewed the Agreement. Before the ...
Hunt v. Moore Bros., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11607 (7th Cir. June 29, 2017): James Hunt worked as a truck driver in Nebraska. On July 1, 2010, he signed an Independent Contractor Operating Agreement with Moore Brothers, a small…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions Properly Denied for Failure to Satisfy Separate Motion Requirement and Afford Opponent 21-Day Safe Harbor

Young v. Third and Mission Assocs., LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9153 (9th Cir. May 25, 2017): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Fanya Young appeals the district court's dismissal of her complaint against Defendants Third & Mission Asso ...
Young v. Third and Mission Assocs., LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9153 (9th Cir. May 25, 2017): *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Fanya Young appeals…
Continue Reading

Corporate Receiver’s Production of Documents from Corp. Authenticates Them — Emails Authenticated by Being Found on Computer of Defendant-Officer of Corp. — Court Disregards Boilerplate Evidentiary Objections on SJ, Can’t Fully Address All Others

FTC v. Kutzner, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174299 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2017):  I. INTRODUCTION Pending before the Court are Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's ("Plaintiff" or &qu ...
FTC v. Kutzner, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174299 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2017):  I. INTRODUCTION Pending before the Court are Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission's ("Plaintiff" or "FTC") Motion for Summary Judgment against Defendants Jeremy Foti ("Foti") and Charles Marshall…
Continue Reading

Arbitration — Equitable Tolling Applies to Motion to Vacate, Modify or Correct an Award under FAA § 12 — Evident Partiality: Standard; Not Shown by Dated, Attenuated or Insubstantial Ties

A. Miner Contr., Inc. v. Dana Kepner Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 15536, 2017 WL 3530894 (9th Cir. Aug. 17, 2017): Appellant A. Miner Contracting, Inc. ("Miner") appeals the district court's order denying Miner's petition to vacate an arbitration award entered against it and in favor of Appellee Dana Kepner Company, Inc ...
A. Miner Contr., Inc. v. Dana Kepner Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 15536, 2017 WL 3530894 (9th Cir. Aug. 17, 2017): Appellant A. Miner Contracting, Inc. ("Miner") appeals the district court's order denying Miner's petition to vacate an arbitration award…
Continue Reading

Rule 41 Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute — Spending Time & Money Pursuing Cooperation Plaintiff Was Obliged to Provide=Prejudice — No Need to Consider Lesser Sanctions If Clear Record of Delay

Migliori v. Microsoft Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 20060 (6th Cir. Oct. 12, 2017): Joseph Migliori, an Ohio resident proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of his products-liability action for ...
Migliori v. Microsoft Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 20060 (6th Cir. Oct. 12, 2017): Joseph Migliori, an Ohio resident proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of his products-liability action for want of prosecution. This case has been referred to…
Continue Reading
Previous112113114115116117118Next

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