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

Is Service of a Subpoena by Federal Express Effective? Circuit Split

Selee Corp. v. McDanal Advanced Ceramic Techs., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117319 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 31, 2016): 2   CoorsTek also challenged Plaintiff's second subpoena [*12]  on the grounds that delivery by Federal Express does not constitute service as contemplated by Rule 45. As no ...
Selee Corp. v. McDanal Advanced Ceramic Techs., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117319 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 31, 2016): 2   CoorsTek also challenged Plaintiff's second subpoena [*12]  on the grounds that delivery by Federal Express does not constitute service as contemplated by Rule…
Continue Reading

Extrinsic Evidence on 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss — Good Discussion of Proper/Improper Use of Judicial Notice and Incorporation by Reference (3 Types) — Unfairness of New Matter in Reply in Era of No Oral Argument

Hsu v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136527 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 30, 2016): ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS Pension Fund, and others filed this lawsuit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5. Defendants Puma B ...
Hsu v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136527 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 30, 2016): ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS Pension Fund, and others filed this lawsuit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") and Securities and Exchange…
Continue Reading

Does Fiduciary Relationship Impose Duty to Disclose Not Otherwise Existing under Securities Laws? — Circuit Split — Duty Usually Depends on Whether Omission Renders Statement False/Misleading, Not Materiality (Texas A.G. Ken Paxton Case)

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Mapp, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140141 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2016): Pending before the Court is Warren K. Paxton, Jr.'s Motion to Dismiss Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 9(b) (Dkt. #16). Having considered the relevant pleadings and oral arguments of the parties, ...
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Mapp, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140141 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2016): Pending before the Court is Warren K. Paxton, Jr.'s Motion to Dismiss Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 9(b) (Dkt. #16). Having…
Continue Reading

Facebook & Viber Messages Authenticated by One Party to Conversation — Kentucky Follows Circumstantial Approach to Authenticity of Social Media — Not “Magical,” Like Photos (Good Quote)

Kays v. Commonwealth, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 177 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 14, 2016):  Casey Kays stands convicted of one count of rape1 and one count of sodomy,2 both in the third degree. Conviction followed an October 2014 trial where jurors chose the maximum sentence of five years on each charge, terms to be served con ...
Kays v. Commonwealth, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 177 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 14, 2016):  Casey Kays stands convicted of one count of rape1 and one count of sodomy,2 both in the third degree. Conviction followed an October 2014 trial where…
Continue Reading

How to Write an Effective Cert Petition (Excellent Discussion and Source Materials) — The Limits of Supreme Court Summary Reversals Given That Discussion of the Merits Is Discouraged in Cert Petitions

Visciotti v Martel, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18579 (9th Cir. Oct. 17, 2016) (Berzon (who wrote the unanimous panel opinion) and Pregerson, concurring): Not surprisingly, I join the principal opinion in full. I write separately to emphasize one point: This case illustrates that Supreme Court summary reversals cannot, and do not, re ...
Visciotti v Martel, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18579 (9th Cir. Oct. 17, 2016) (Berzon (who wrote the unanimous panel opinion) and Pregerson, concurring): Not surprisingly, I join the principal opinion in full. I write separately to emphasize one point: This …
Continue Reading

Disqualification — Mandamus: Nonparty’s Ex-Lawyer Pointing Finger at Nonparty Subject to Prosecution — Trial Taint = Substantial Relationship + Confidential Info — Collateral Order Doctrine Inapt — Confidentiality

United States v. Prevezon Holdings, Ltd., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18614 (2d Cir. Oct. 17, 2016): Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Thomas P. Griesa, J.)2 from the denial of Hermitage Capital Management Ltd.'s ("Hermitage") motion to disqualify counsel for Pre ...
United States v. Prevezon Holdings, Ltd., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18614 (2d Cir. Oct. 17, 2016): Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Thomas P. Griesa, J.)2 from the denial of Hermitage Capital Management…
Continue Reading

District Courts Must Generally Follow Their Own Local Rules (Good Quote) — No Sanctions for Conduct Consistent with Local Rules — If Order Is Reversed, Are Sanctions Imposed for Violating It Necessarily Reversed? — Not Always

Drone Techs., Inc. v. Parrot S.A., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 17643 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 29, 2016): Parrot, S.A. and Parrot, Inc. (collectively, "Parrot") appeal from the final judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania that awarded Drone Technologies, Inc. ("Drone") damages ...
Drone Techs., Inc. v. Parrot S.A., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 17643 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 29, 2016): Parrot, S.A. and Parrot, Inc. (collectively, "Parrot") appeal from the final judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania …
Continue Reading

Arbitration — Refusal to Grant Continuance Sought by Both Parties Not Per Se Ground for Vacatur under FAA §10(a)(3) (vacatur for “misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing”) — Arbitrator May Consider Own Convenience & Need for Expedition

CM S.E. Texas Houston, LLC v. CareMinders Home Care, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18218 (11th Cir. Oct. 7, 2016): PER CURIAM: CareMinders Home Care, Inc. appeals the district court's confirmation of an arbitration award in favor of plaintiffs CM South East Texas Houston, LLC and South East Texas KCH Co., LLC. CareMind ...
CM S.E. Texas Houston, LLC v. CareMinders Home Care, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18218 (11th Cir. Oct. 7, 2016): PER CURIAM: CareMinders Home Care, Inc. appeals the district court's confirmation of an arbitration award in favor of plaintiffs CM …
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions — Failure to Provide Opportunity to Be Heard Requires Vacatur of Sanction (Dismissal of Prisoner Action after Shard of Glass Found in Envelope to Court But Prisoner Denies Responsibility)

Birdo v. Urbanosky, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 18632 (7th Cir. Oct. 23, 2015): Kevin Birdo, an Illinois inmate, broke a finger in August 2012. By his account the prison medical staff waited three weeks before treating the injury and then, after acknowledging that surgery was needed because the delay had caused the break to heal improperly, ...
Birdo v. Urbanosky, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 18632 (7th Cir. Oct. 23, 2015): Kevin Birdo, an Illinois inmate, broke a finger in August 2012. By his account the prison medical staff waited three weeks before treating the injury and then,…
Continue Reading
Previous150151152153154155156Next

Recent Posts

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

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

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