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

Rule 16(f) Sanctions — Dismissal for Repeated Failures to Obey Scheduling Orders Despite Multiple Reprieves — Different Result If Deadlines Not Clearly Communicated

McKeague v. One World Techs., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10240 (1st Cir. June 8, 2017):  This appeal arises out of a civil case in which the plaintiff's two lawyers did nothing to prosecute the plaintiff's claims within generous deadlines, received a second chance, and then failed to oppose a pending motion for summary judgm ...
McKeague v. One World Techs., Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10240 (1st Cir. June 8, 2017):  This appeal arises out of a civil case in which the plaintiff's two lawyers did nothing to prosecute the plaintiff's claims within generous deadlines,…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — No Abuse of Discretion to Impose Monetary Sanctions & Not Adverse Inference Where Ex-Employee 4 Times Attempted to Delete Data from Hard Drive and Was Not Candid in Discovery (No Reference to Rule 37(e))

Integrated Direct Mktg., LLC v. May, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9369 (4th Cir. May 30, 2017): PER CURIAM: Integrated Direct Marketing, LLC ("IDM") appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to Drew May and Merkle, Inc. ("Merkle," collectively, "Defendants"), whom it accused of misappropri ...
Integrated Direct Mktg., LLC v. May, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9369 (4th Cir. May 30, 2017): PER CURIAM: Integrated Direct Marketing, LLC ("IDM") appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to Drew May and Merkle, Inc. ("Merkle," collectively, "Defendants"),…
Continue Reading

Fee-Splitting Agreement Unenforceable for Lack of Client Consent Per Model Rule 1.5(e)(2) (Case law Split), But Quantum Meruit OK — “Defendants … Develop An Argument Grounded in Their Regret Rather Than on Terms of the … Agreement” (Good Quote)

Parker Waichman LLP v. Salas L/C, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108823 (D.P.R. July 13, 2017): Before the Court is defendants John F. Nevares and Associates, P.S.C. ("Nevares")'s, Salas LC ("Salas")'s, and Eric J. Quetglas-Jordan d/b/a Quetglas Law Firm ("Quetglas")'s  motion to dismiss plaintiff Parker Waichman ...
Parker Waichman LLP v. Salas L/C, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108823 (D.P.R. July 13, 2017): Before the Court is defendants John F. Nevares and Associates, P.S.C. ("Nevares")'s, Salas LC ("Salas")'s, and Eric J. Quetglas-Jordan d/b/a Quetglas Law Firm ("Quetglas")'s  motion…
Continue Reading

FRAP 39’s “Costs” Don’t Include Attorney’s Fees (F.R.Civ.P. 68 Distinguished) — Denial of “Costs” in Appellate Mandate Doesn’t Bar Award of Fees for Success on Appeal under Fee-Shifting Statute Defining Fees as “Costs”

Hines v. City of Albany, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12042 (2d Cir. July 6, 2017): Constance and Marshay Hines appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Suddaby, C.J.) denying their motion for attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. This is the third t ...
Hines v. City of Albany, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12042 (2d Cir. July 6, 2017): Constance and Marshay Hines appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Suddaby, C.J.) denying their…
Continue Reading

Blogs, Like Newspaper Articles, Are Hearsay When Offered for the Truth

Welch v. City of Albuquerque, 2016 WL 8809479 (D. N.M. May 13, 2016): *1 THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Defendants Raymond Schultz, William Roseman, Cecil Knox, David Hubbard, Robert Smith, J.R. Potter, and Kevin Gagne’s (Defendants) Second Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion for ...
Welch v. City of Albuquerque, 2016 WL 8809479 (D. N.M. May 13, 2016): *1 THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon Defendants Raymond Schultz, William Roseman, Cecil Knox, David Hubbard, Robert Smith, J.R. Potter, and Kevin Gagne’s (Defendants) Second Motion…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions for Filing Notice of Dismissal Instead of Agreeing to Dismiss with Prejudice — Fact Plaintiff Had to Post Bond to Sue Put Lawyer on Notice of Potential Frivolousness — Bad Faith, Improper Purpose Interchangeable in 6th Circuit

U.S. ex rel. Tingley v. PNC Fin’l Servs. Grp., 2017 WL 3098178 (6th Cir. July 21, 2017): *1 Relator William Tingley, III repeatedly filed claims alleging varying theories of liability—including liability under the False Claims Act and Michigan’s Hazardous Waste Management Act and liability for bank fraud, tax ev ...
U.S. ex rel. Tingley v. PNC Fin’l Servs. Grp., 2017 WL 3098178 (6th Cir. July 21, 2017): *1 Relator William Tingley, III repeatedly filed claims alleging varying theories of liability—including liability under the False Claims Act and Michigan’s Hazardous Waste…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Finding of Professional Misconduct Appealable Even If No Sanction Imposed — Extrajudicial Conduct Sanctionable under Inherent Power — Rule 41(a)(1) Dismissal OK for Any Reason, Including to “Flee the Jurisdiction or the Judge”

Adams v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 13369 (8th Cir. July 25, 2017): In this consolidated appeal, the appellants, attorneys for plaintiffs2 and defendants3 in a putative class action, appeal from the district court's orders (1) finding that the appellants violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ...
Adams v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 13369 (8th Cir. July 25, 2017): In this consolidated appeal, the appellants, attorneys for plaintiffs2 and defendants3 in a putative class action, appeal from the district court's orders (1) finding…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence: Notice Taken on 12(b)(1) Motion of Records on Gov’t & University Websites, and Docs Obtained via FOIA, for Purpose of Showing the Info Was Publicly Available — Wayback Machine Results, Too

U.S. ex rel. Hong v. Newport Sensors, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188295 (C.D. Cal. May 19, 2016): PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE (Doc. 52) Before the Court is a Motion to Dismi ...
U.S. ex rel. Hong v. Newport Sensors, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188295 (C.D. Cal. May 19, 2016): PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE (Doc. …
Continue Reading

§ 1927 Sanctions: Recklessness Alone Insufficient — Argument Not Frivolous If Issue Unresolved and Out-of-Circuit Precedent Supports It — Failure to Withdraw Claim & Opposing Dismissal Once Aware of Baselessness Is Sanctionable

Stone Creek, Inc. v Omnia Italian Design, Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12393 (9th Cir. July 11, 2017):   This appeal, set in the high-stakes world of furniture sales, runs the gamut of trademark infringement issues. The facts are somewhat unusual: the alleged infringer, leather furniture manufacturer Omnia I ...
Stone Creek, Inc. v Omnia Italian Design, Inc., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12393 (9th Cir. July 11, 2017):   This appeal, set in the high-stakes world of furniture sales, runs the gamut of trademark infringement issues. The facts are somewhat unusual:…
Continue Reading

Rule 36 Admissions — Judge “Implicitly” Allowed Withdrawal by Admitting Contrary Testimony: “To Order a New Trial on the Basis of a Technical Error Would Be to Arrogate Form over Substance, Wasting Everybody’s Time to No Purpose” (Good Quote)

The plaintiff, which for simplicity we'll call just Tate, sells ingredients used in the food and beverage industry. The defendant, Glatt, a member of a substantial German conglomerate called the Glatt group, sells processing equipment to the food industry. In 2008 Tate and Glatt made a contract whereby Glatt would for $7,042,022 design and build a three-story ...
The plaintiff, which for simplicity we'll call just Tate, sells ingredients used in the food and beverage industry. The defendant, Glatt, a member of a substantial German conglomerate called the Glatt group, sells processing equipment to the food industry. In…
Continue Reading
Previous122123124125126127128Next

Recent Posts

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

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Abuse of Discretion Review = Legal Conclusions De Novo. Factual Findings for Clear Error — (2) Client May Be Sanctioned for Misconduct of Its Counsel, Though Here Client Was Directly Involved in Bad Faith Misbehavior — (3) Is There A Difference, Under Rule 11 As Opposed to Rule 37, Concerning Whether A Client Can Be Sanctioned for Its Counsel’s Misconduct? — (4) While Sanctions of Last Resort (Dismissal/Default) Are Apt Only If Lesser Sanctions Wouldn’t Ensure Compliance, Rule 37 Doesn’t Require the Vain Gesture of First Imposing Lessert Sanctions When It Is Clear They Would be Ineffective — (5) Court’s Reconsideration of Non-Final Orders Is Governed by Rule 54(b), And Court’s Discretion under That Rule Is Governed by the Law-of-the-Case-Doctrine

RICO: (1) Special Pleading Requirements? — (2) Although Enterprise Must Be More Than a Summation of the Predicate Acts, The Predicate Acts Can Demonstrate the Existence of the Enterprise — (3) Requirement That Association-in-Fact Exist For Purposes Other Than Just to Commit Predicate Acts Merely Requires Continuity — (4) To State an Association-in-Fact Enterprise Consisting of One Natural Person and Collection of Legal Fictions Requires Factual Detail As to How They Acted Together — (5) “A § 1962(c) Enterprise Must Be More Than An Association of Individuals Or Entities Conducting the Normal Affairs of a Defendant Corporation” (Good Quote)

RICO: (1) Fee Award May Exceed Amount Recovered — Strict Proportionality Not Required — (2) Nonmonetary Benefits and Injunctive Relief Recovered Also Relevant Factors — (3) Loss on Some Claims Need Not Result in Lowered Fees, Especially When Both Arise Out of The Same Nucleus of Operative Facts

RICO: Indirect Purchasers (Car Buyers/Renters) Lack Standing to Sue Manufacturers for RICO Violations Even Though Intermediaries (Auto Dealer Direct Purchasers) Lack Any Damages

RICO: Statutory Requirement that RICO Be Liberally Construed Does Not Establish a More Liberal Pleading Standard for RICO Claims — “To Be Sure, Adequately Pleading a RICO Claim Can Be Challenging” (Good Quote) — Court May Dismiss Action Pursuant to Rule 41(b) Absent A Motion

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

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