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

YouTube Admissibility — Third Party Statements on Video = Hearsay

Patton v. Warden, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93574 (S.D. Ohio June 19, 2017): REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS This habeas corpus case under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is before the Court for decision on the merits. Upon initial review of the Petition (ECF No. 1), the Court ordered the State to answer the Petition and set a date t ...
Patton v. Warden, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93574 (S.D. Ohio June 19, 2017): REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS This habeas corpus case under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is before the Court for decision on the merits. Upon initial review of the Petition…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court—Specific Jurisdiction: State Court Lacks Personal Jur. over Defendant re Nonresidents’ Claims Identical to Those of Residents’, Absent Connection between Forum & Claims — Must Sue in State with Gen. Jur. or Maybe Federal Court

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 2017 U.S. LEXIS 3873 (U.S. June 19, 2017): More than 600 plaintiffs, most of whom are not California residents, filed this civil [*6]  action in a California state court against Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMS), asserting a variety of state-law claims based on injuries allegedly caused by ...
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 2017 U.S. LEXIS 3873 (U.S. June 19, 2017): More than 600 plaintiffs, most of whom are not California residents, filed this civil [*6]  action in a California state court against Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMS),…
Continue Reading

Blog Admissibility: Third-Party Blog Posts Are Hearsay

Spellman v. Benjamin Moore & Co., 2016 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 18216 (Ct. Com. Pl. Oct. 7, 2016): This appeal follows a jury trial concluded in May of 2016, in which the jury found in favor of Defendant, Benjamin Moore & Co., on Plaintiffs' claims against Benjamin Moore & Co. for alleged fraudulent misrepresentation, ...
Spellman v. Benjamin Moore & Co., 2016 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 18216 (Ct. Com. Pl. Oct. 7, 2016): This appeal follows a jury trial concluded in May of 2016, in which the jury found in favor of Defendant, …
Continue Reading

Spoliation of Tangible Evidence — Bad Faith Still Required for Adverse Inference Instruction in Tenth Circuit

Rife v Okla. Dep’t of Public Safety, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1117 (10th Cir. April 12, 2017) (note: this opinion amends the opinion excerpted in our posting of February 21, 2017): ORDER This matter is before the court on appellees McCurtain County Jail Trust, Chad Dale and Jonathon Will ...
Rife v Okla. Dep’t of Public Safety, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1117 (10th Cir. April 12, 2017) (note: this opinion amends the opinion excerpted in our posting of February 21, 2017): ORDER This matter is before the court…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court: Class Actions — Plaintiffs Denied Certification Can’t Voluntarily Dismiss Individual Claims to Appeal Certification & Revive Their Claims If They Win — Must Try the Case — Rule 23(f) Is Sole Avenue for Interlocutory Review

Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, 2017 U.S. LEXIS 3721 (U.S. June 12, 2017): This case concerns options open to plaintiffs, when denied class-action [*7]  certification by a district court, to gain appellate review of the district court's order. Orders granting or denying class certification, this Court has held, are "inherently int ...
Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, 2017 U.S. LEXIS 3721 (U.S. June 12, 2017): This case concerns options open to plaintiffs, when denied class-action [*7]  certification by a district court, to gain appellate review of the district court's order. Orders granting or…
Continue Reading

Rule 41(b) Dismissal of Claim Asserted by Corporation Not Represented by Counsel Proper — Corp. Must Be Represented — In C.D. Cal., Same Applies to LLCs under Local Rule

Bourbeau v. Cogntive Code Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8444 (9th Cir. May 11, 2017): AMENDED MEMORANDUM* *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Plaintiffs-Appellants John Bourbeau, Joseph G. Odish, ...
Bourbeau v. Cogntive Code Corp., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8444 (9th Cir. May 11, 2017): AMENDED MEMORANDUM* *   This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Plaintiffs-Appellants John Bourbeau,…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions — Empty Head, Pure Heart Defense Fails — Reasonable Assessment of Res Judicata/Collateral Estoppel Bar Required — Motive Behind Rule 11 Motion Irrelevant [Improper Purpose Impossible?]

Clemmons v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3797 (10th Cir. Mar. 2, 2017): *   These consolidated appeals were ordered submitted on the briefs on October 20, 2016. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, howe ...
Clemmons v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3797 (10th Cir. Mar. 2, 2017): *   These consolidated appeals were ordered submitted on the briefs on October 20, 2016. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under…
Continue Reading

RICO Limitations: If Storm Warnings, Plaintiff Must Show It “Exercised Due Diligence But Couldn’t Find and Avoid the Storm” (Good Quote) — Can a Lawsuit Be a Predicate Act? — It Won’t Revive Claim by Attaching Out-of-Time Fraudulent Documents

Hawk Mountain LLC v. Ram Capital Grp. LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8492 (3d Cir. May 12, 2017): *   This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. In a case awash in apparent scandal our ruling today is decidedly ordinary: The plaintiffs' civil claims ...
Hawk Mountain LLC v. Ram Capital Grp. LLC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8492 (3d Cir. May 12, 2017): *   This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. In…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Vexatious Litigant Injunction—Abuse of Discretion: Less Deference If “Unaccompanied by Reasoning” (Good Quotes) —Different Injns on Similarly Situated Parties, 1 Harsher Than Sought, Reversed

In re Ross, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10004 (3d Cir. June 6, 2017): Raymond Ross appeals from a broad filing injunction issued against him by the Bankruptcy Court after he and his wife used the bankruptcy process to stave off the sheriff's sale of their home. Ross argues that, as a matter of law, a bankruptcy court may never is ...
In re Ross, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10004 (3d Cir. June 6, 2017): Raymond Ross appeals from a broad filing injunction issued against him by the Bankruptcy Court after he and his wife used the bankruptcy process to stave off …
Continue Reading

RICO: Marijuana Growing=Predicate Act—Business Is Primarily Criminal—RICO Incorporates Common Law of Nuisance—Adjacent Property Plausibly Injured by Odors, Openly Criminal Acts—How “Concrete” Must Injury Be? Is There a Circuit Split?

Safe Streets Alliance v. Hickenlooper, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10101 (10th Cir. June 7, 2017): These three appeals arise from two cases that concern the passage, implementation, and alleged effects of Amendment 64 to the Colorado Constitution, Colo. Const. art. XVIII, § 16. Amendment 64 repealed many of the State's criminal ...
Safe Streets Alliance v. Hickenlooper, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10101 (10th Cir. June 7, 2017): These three appeals arise from two cases that concern the passage, implementation, and alleged effects of Amendment 64 to the Colorado Constitution, Colo. Const. art. …
Continue Reading
Previous127128129130131132133Next

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