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

Attorney’s Fees: Is Travel Time Compensable? — Circuit Split

Hines v. DeWitt, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59344 (S.D. Ohio May 4, 2016): This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Joseph Hines's petitions for attorneys' fees and costs. (Fee Petition of Goldstein Firm, Doc. 108; Fee Petition of Fieger Firm, Doc. 109). Overbilling began at the beginning when three attorneys met with Hines, ch ...
Hines v. DeWitt, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59344 (S.D. Ohio May 4, 2016): This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Joseph Hines's petitions for attorneys' fees and costs. (Fee Petition of Goldstein Firm, Doc. 108; Fee Petition of Fieger…
Continue Reading

Rule 37(b)/Inherent Power Sanctions: Dismissal OK Where Plaintiff Uncooperative in Initial Production & Then Flouts Discovery Order — Court Not Required to Coax Compliance via Incrementally Increasing Sanctions — Review Not Perfunctory (Good Quotes)

Timms v. LZM, LLC, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12377 (5th Cir. July 5, 2016): Plaintiff--Appellant Heather Timms appeals from sanctions levied against her by the district court. Timms contends that the district court abused its discretion when it struck her amended complaint and awarded costs and fees to Defendants--Appellees LZM, L.L.C., an ...
Timms v. LZM, LLC, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12377 (5th Cir. July 5, 2016): Plaintiff–Appellant Heather Timms appeals from sanctions levied against her by the district court. Timms contends that the district court abused its discretion when it struck her…
Continue Reading

§ 1782 Applications Are Properly Brought Ex Parte — Discovery Sought to Defend Hong Kong Defamation Suit on Grounds That Sheldon Adelson Is “Foul-Mouthed”

In re Application of Kate O’Keeffe, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9615 (2d Cir. May 26, 2016): Movant-appellant Sheldon G. Adelson ("Adelson") appeals from an April 1, 2016 order of the District Court denying his motion to quash a subpoena served by petitioner-appellee Kate O'Keeffe ("O'Keeffe") upon Adels ...
In re Application of Kate O’Keeffe, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9615 (2d Cir. May 26, 2016): Movant-appellant Sheldon G. Adelson ("Adelson") appeals from an April 1, 2016 order of the District Court denying his motion to quash a subpoena served …
Continue Reading

RICO & Res Judicata — Mere Addition of Claims, Defendants to Same Facts Doesn’t Avoid Preclusion Bar — Can’t Relitigate Final Judgment by Adding Subsequent Facts to Adjudicated 16-Year-Long Set of Events

Zahl v. Warhaftig, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12155 (3d Cir. July 1, 2016): Kenneth Zahl, M.D. appeals the final decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granting summary judgment in favor of a group of defendants comprised of current and former employees in the Office of the Attorney General of New Jersey ("O ...
Zahl v. Warhaftig, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12155 (3d Cir. July 1, 2016): Kenneth Zahl, M.D. appeals the final decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granting summary judgment in favor of a group of…
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege — 5-Factor Test Corporate Employees Claiming Corp. Counsel Represented Them Must Satisfy — What If a Reasonable Lay Person Would Misunderstand the Upjohn Warning? (See Concurrence)

United States v. Merida, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12786 (10th Cir. July 12, 2016): I. INTRODUCTION Jason Brett Merida, the former executive director of construction for the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (the Nation), was convicted after a fifteen-day jury trial on six counts of a seven-count indictment. The in ...
United States v. Merida, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12786 (10th Cir. July 12, 2016): I. INTRODUCTION Jason Brett Merida, the former executive director of construction for the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (the Nation), was convicted after a fifteen-day jury trial …
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege: Government Official Has No Personal Privilege with Government Lawyer Consulted on Ethics Issues (Government Holds Privilege) — Perhaps Different If Government Lawyer Representing Official Personally

In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12860 (9th Cir. July 13, 2016): This case arises in the midst of an investigation by the federal government into activities of the former Governor of Oregon, John Kitzhaber. A grand jury's subpoena seeks a broad range of information [*3]  from the S ...
In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12860 (9th Cir. July 13, 2016): This case arises in the midst of an investigation by the federal government into activities of the former Governor of Oregon, John Kitzhaber. A…
Continue Reading

Voicemail Left for Employee A by Employee B, Who Was Investigating Employee A’s Race, Age & Gender Discrimination Claim, Is Admissible against Employer as an 801(d)(2) Admission

Ritchie v. Napolitano, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89279 (D.D.C. July 11, 2016): Plaintiff Scott Ritchie brings suit under (i) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII") for race discrimination; (ii) Title VII for gender discrimination; and (iii) the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (the "ADEA") for age ...
Ritchie v. Napolitano, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89279 (D.D.C. July 11, 2016): Plaintiff Scott Ritchie brings suit under (i) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII") for race discrimination; (ii) Title VII for gender discrimination; and…
Continue Reading

Rule 37(c)(1) Sanctions — Critical Witness Affidavit Struck (Resulting in Summary Judgment) for Failure to Update Per 26(e) Witness’s Address on 26(a) Disclosure or Give Affidavit — Query re Affidavit: What about Hickman v. Taylor?

Emanuel v. Cnty. of Wayne, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 11385 (6th Cir. June 20, 2016):  Plaintiff Lennox Emanuel was arrested after Wayne County Sheriff's Office personnel observed him speaking with a known prostitute, inviting the woman into his car, and then driving her to a motel parking lot a few miles away. After a Michigan state-c ...
Emanuel v. Cnty. of Wayne, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 11385 (6th Cir. June 20, 2016):  Plaintiff Lennox Emanuel was arrested after Wayne County Sheriff's Office personnel observed him speaking with a known prostitute, inviting the woman into his car, and…
Continue Reading

RICO Enterprise: Is Association of a Few Individuals, without Meaningful Structure, Distinct from Those Individuals? — Good Quotes on RICO Predicates & Elements, Including Interstate Commerce (All Telephone Calls Are Presumed to Be Intrastate)

Aliev v. Borukhov, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88856 (E.D.N.Y. July 8, 2016): On October 26, 2015, plaintiff Fariz Aliev ("Aliev") filed a complaint principally seeking damages against Neriya Borukhov, his brother Aron Borukhov, and two other individuals, Stella Akbashev ("Akbashev"), and Roshel Malakov ("Ma ...
Aliev v. Borukhov, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88856 (E.D.N.Y. July 8, 2016): On October 26, 2015, plaintiff Fariz Aliev ("Aliev") filed a complaint principally seeking damages against Neriya Borukhov, his brother Aron Borukhov, and two other individuals, Stella Akbashev ("Akbashev"), …
Continue Reading

RICO: Each Member of Enterprise Needn’t Know Each Other’s Role — Enough to Know General Nature of Enterprise & That It Extends Beyond His/Her Role — Conspiracy Conflation — Impact on Hub & Spoke?

United States v. Christensen, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12738 (9th Cir. July 8, 2016): Six defendants appeal their criminal convictions stemming from a widespread criminal enterprise offering illegal private investigation services in Southern California. At the center of this criminal enterprise was Pellicano Investigative Agency, ...
United States v. Christensen, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12738 (9th Cir. July 8, 2016): Six defendants appeal their criminal convictions stemming from a widespread criminal enterprise offering illegal private investigation services in Southern California. At the center of this criminal …
Continue Reading
Previous160161162163164165166Next

Recent Posts

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

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

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