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

Spoliation — Adverse Inference Instruction “Usually Makes Sense” Only If Bad Faith — Undercut by Prior Notice of Destruction & Opportunity to Analyze — Sanctions Should Fit the Crime — Merits Decision Preferred

Sharp v. Hylas Yachts, LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 18388 (1st Cir. Sept. 22, 2017): Following an eleven-day jury trial and verdict, the district court entered judgment against Hylas Yachts, LLC and in favor of plaintiffs Nelson Sharp and his LLC, Destiny Yachts, in the amount of $663,774 plus interest and costs, on account of numerous d ...
Sharp v. Hylas Yachts, LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 18388 (1st Cir. Sept. 22, 2017): Following an eleven-day jury trial and verdict, the district court entered judgment against Hylas Yachts, LLC and in favor of plaintiffs Nelson Sharp and his…
Continue Reading

Diversity Jurisdiction: What Is the Citizenship of a Dissolved or Inactive Corporation? Circuit Split

Pratt v. Green Bay Distribs., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157351 (S.D. Ind. Sept. 25, 2017): [*1] ORDER ON SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Sua sponte, the Court raised the issue of whether or not this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action based on complete diversity between the parties. ...
Pratt v. Green Bay Distribs., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157351 (S.D. Ind. Sept. 25, 2017): [*1] ORDER ON SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Sua sponte, the Court raised the issue of whether or not this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this…
Continue Reading

Subject Matter & Personal Jurisdiction: Yelp, TripAdvisor Pages Set Up by Third Parties, Not Defendant, Thus Irrelevant to Minimum Contacts — Twitter: Following Resident of State (Sports Team) Not Enough: Where Does a Tweet Exist?

Blue Water Int’l, Inc. v. Hattrick’s Irish Sports Pub, LLC, 2017 WL 4182405 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 21, 2017): ORDER *1 Several “Hattrick’s” bars serve food and alcohol in the United States.1
Blue Water Int’l, Inc. v. Hattrick’s Irish Sports Pub, LLC, 2017 WL 4182405 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 21, 2017): ORDER *1 Several “Hattrick’s” bars serve food and alcohol in the United States.1 Most market themselves as sports bars (in hockey …
Continue Reading

Recusal: Judge’s Twitter Account’s Following of US Atty’s Office Twitter Account Not Enough — Rule 60(d)(3): Not All Fraud Is Fraud on the Court — Standards — Must Be Post-Judgment; Here, Barred by Settlement of Unknown Claims

United States v. Sierra Pacific Indus., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12528 (9th Cir. July 13, 2017): We are asked to decide whether certain allegations of fraud, some of which were known before the parties settled and some of which came to light after settlement, rise to the level of fraud on the court such that relief from the ...
United States v. Sierra Pacific Indus., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12528 (9th Cir. July 13, 2017): We are asked to decide whether certain allegations of fraud, some of which were known before the parties settled and some of which …
Continue Reading

Rule 37(b) Dismissal: Factors (5th Cir.) — Abuse of Discretion: Review More Rigorous for Substantial Sanctions — While Court Needn’t Incrementally Increase Sanctions to Dismissal, It Should at Least Consider Lesser Sanctions First

Oprex Surgery (Baytown), LP v. Sonic Auto. Empl. Welfare Ben. Plan, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 14811 (5th Cir. Aug. 10, 2017): *   Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. Plaintif ...
Oprex Surgery (Baytown), LP v. Sonic Auto. Empl. Welfare Ben. Plan, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 14811 (5th Cir. Aug. 10, 2017): *   Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and…
Continue Reading

Class Actions: Rule 23(f) Isn’t Jurisdictional — Motion for Reconsideration within 14 Days of Certification Order Tolls 23(f) Deadline — So Does Statement of Intent to File Motion (Circuit Split on This)

Lambert v. Nutraceutical Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 17923 (9th Cir. Sept. 15, 2017): Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) allows a litigant to seek an interlocutory appeal of a distric ...
Lambert v. Nutraceutical Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 17923 (9th Cir. Sept. 15, 2017): Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) allows a litigant to seek an interlocutory appeal of a district court's order granting or denying class certification. This case …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Court Can’t Use Rule 60(a), Years after Judgment Entered, to “Clarify” That Sanctions against Lawyer Include Firm, to Reflect A New & Subsequent Intent — Only Doable under 60(b) within 1 Year

Le v. Humphrey, 2017 WL 3327797 (11th Cir. Aug. 4, 2017): *1 Following multiple unsuccessful efforts in federal and state court to enforce a monetary sanctions order, and over two years after that order was entered, Phuc Quang Le convinced the district court to amend its order under
Le v. Humphrey, 2017 WL 3327797 (11th Cir. Aug. 4, 2017): *1 Following multiple unsuccessful efforts in federal and state court to enforce a monetary sanctions order, and over two years after that order was entered, Phuc Quang Le convinced …
Continue Reading

Securities: Are Allegations of Loss Causation Subject to Rule 9(b)? — Circuit Split — Anyone Who Purchased and Sold in the Class Period Can’t Show Loss Causation

In re VEON Ltd. Secs. Litig., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1522402017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152240 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 19, 2017): Lead Plaintiff Westway Alliance Corp. brings this putative class action on behalf of all those who purchased the securities of Defendant VEON Ltd. between December 2, 2010 and November 3, 2015, against VEON and a number of ...
In re VEON Ltd. Secs. Litig., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1522402017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152240 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 19, 2017): Lead Plaintiff Westway Alliance Corp. brings this putative class action on behalf of all those who purchased the securities of Defendant…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Striking Affirmative Defense Based on Fraudulent Evidence OK under Inherent Power, and Awarding Attorney’s Fees Incurred Due to Reliance on the Stricken Fraudulent Evidence on Summary Judgment OK under Rule 11

Edge Sys. LLC v. Aguila, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 17365 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 8, 2017): Rafael Newton Aguila appeals from the final judgement of the Southern District of Florida in a trademark and patent infringement suit filed by Edge Systems LLC and Axia Medscienes, LLC.1< ...
Edge Sys. LLC v. Aguila, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 17365 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 8, 2017): Rafael Newton Aguila appeals from the final judgement of the Southern District of Florida in a trademark and patent infringement suit filed by Edge Systems …
Continue Reading

RICO: Sub Operated by Holding Co. + Affiliate ≠ Enterprise But Unified Structure, Single Corp. Consciousness — No Evidence Subs’ Acts Outside Ordinary Course or Structure Set Up or Used to Further Racketeering

U1it4less, Inc. v. FedEx Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 17990 (2d Cir. Sept. 18, 2017): U1IT4Less, Inc., d/b/a NYBikerGear ("BikerGear"), an internet retailer of motorcycle gear, accuses FedEx Corporation and its subsidiaries FedEx Corporate Services, Inc. and FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.
U1it4less, Inc. v. FedEx Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 17990 (2d Cir. Sept. 18, 2017): U1IT4Less, Inc., d/b/a NYBikerGear ("BikerGear"), an internet retailer of motorcycle gear, accuses FedEx Corporation and its subsidiaries FedEx Corporate Services, Inc. and FedEx Ground Package…
Continue Reading
Previous117118119120121122123Next

Recent Posts

RICO Causation: Parents of Children with Disabilities Deprived In-Person Education and Services during the Pandemic Were Not Causally Injured by Teachers’ False Assurances to Federal Authorities That IDEA-Complaint Policies Were in Place, Which Caused Funds to Issue But Not to the Benefit of the Disabled Children — Damages Too Indirect — Proper Plaintiff Is U.S. Government — Private Injunctive Relief Under RICO Uncertain in Third Circuit

Sanctions: Rule 37(b)(2) Dismissal — Sixth Circuit Factors

Inherent Power Sanctions — Extrajudicial Misconduct: Sanctions Power Extends to Conduct Intended to Sabotage Court’s Ability to Adjudicate the Case Before It, Here, By Commencing State Court Actions Seeking to Enjoin the Federal Plaintiffs from Proceeding with Their Federal Litigation — Sanctions Fee Awards: The Factors Used For Calculating A Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Do Not Govern — Under Goodyear, the Relevant Inquiry Is Whether There Is A Sufficient Causal Link Between The Sanctioned Misconduct And The Fees Awarded

RICO: Members of Association-in-Fact Enterprise Must Act with a Common Purpose—Mere Allegation That Various Defendants Agreed at Different Times to Engage in Various Fraudulent Schemes Does Not Plausibly Support the Essential Inference, That They Acted with s Sufficiently Common Purpose

RICO Causation: (1) State’s Misrepresentation to Federal Government That It Was Providing Plaintiffs with Mandated Special Education Did Not Cause Plaintiffs’ Injury Because The Failure to Provide The Education Was Not Caused by the Fraud on the Federal Government — (2) The Three Factors for Assessing RICO Causation — (3) Limits of the Second Circuit’s Decision in Alix v. McKinsey That Causation Can Be Established Where A Fraud On The Judiciary “Or Other Governmental Entity” Resulted In A Resource Going To Someone Less Deserving

Rule 41(b): Five Factors to Be Weighed in Deciding Whether Dismissal Is Appropriate (Second Circuit) — Is A Finding of Bad Faith or Fault Required if Dismissal Is Without Prejudice? — Undecided If Truly Without Prejudice But It Is Required If the Without Prejudice Dismissal Will Act as a Dismissal on the Merits (Here, Because of the Statute of Limitations) — Failure To Consider A Lesser Sanction Than Dismissal Is Generally An Abuse Of Discretion

Spoliation Sanctions/Mootness: Stipulation Resolving “All Pending Discovery Disputes,” Which Are Enumerated, Does Not Moot Subsequent Sanctions Motion for ESI Spoliation — Postjudgment Sanctions Order Is Appealable When District Court Has Finally Disposed of Both Liability and Amount

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Default Judgment Appropriate Only As a Last Resort, When Less Drastic Sanctions Would Not Ensure Compliance with the Court’s Orders — (2) Default Judgment Sanction Requires Willful or Bad Faith Failure to Obey Discovery Order — (3) Fugitive Defendant’s Failure to Appear at Court-Ordered, Remote Deposition Despite Court Warning That Sanctions Could Follow Disobedience Warrants Default Judgment — (4) District Court Afforded Wide Discretion in Interpreting Its Own Orders — (5) Filing a Notice of Appeal from a Non-Appealable Order (Here, a Discovery Order) Does Not Deprive the District Court of Jurisdiction over the Case

RICO and Injunctions: (1) State Court Actions Designed to Perpetuate and Monetize a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable under RICO, Even Though They Are Not Themselves Alleged to Be Predicate Acts [Note: Noerr Pennington Applies in RICO Actions] — (2) Although Civil RICO’s Text and Legislative History Fail to Reveal Any Intent to Override the Provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act, Arbitrations Are Enjoinable Under the “Effective Vindication” Doctrine Where They Operate As a Prospective Waiver of a Party’s Right to Pursue Statutory RICO Remedies — (3) Arbitration Findings May Be Given Collateral Estoppel Effect in a Civil RICO Action — (4) Injunction of Non-Corrupt State Court Litigations That Furthers a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable Under the Anti-Injunction Act’s “Expressly Authorized” Exception — (5) “The Irreparable Harm Requirement Is The Single Most Important Prerequisite For The Issuance Of A Preliminary Injunction” (Good Quote) — (6) When Injunction Is Based on “Serious Questions on the Merits” Rather Than “Likelihood of Success,” Court May Rely on Unverified Pleadings and Attached Exhibits to Assess the Merits, Unless the Opponent Has Raised Substantial Questions (Here, the Opponent Failed to Request an Evidentiary Hearing) — (7) Whether Amended Pleading Moots An Appeal Turns on Whether It Materially Changes the Substantive Basis for the Appeal — (8) Meaning of “In That” (“Used To Introduce A Statement That Explains Or Gives More Specific Information” About A Prior Statement)

RICO: Fraudulent Concealment Must Prevent Discovery of the Injury to Toll Statute of Limitations

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