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 37(c) Sanctions — Are Attorney’s Fees for Lawyer Not Admitted Pro Hac Vice Recoverable? (Circuit Split) — Only Paralegal Tasks Traditionally Performed by Lawyers Generate Recoverable Fees — Local Rates Govern

Warder v. Shaw Grp., Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81822 (E.D. La. June 23, 2016): On March 16, 2016, this Court heard oral argument on Shaw Environmental, Inc.'s Second Motion to Compel [Doc. #200] and Shaw Environmental, Inc.'s Motion for Attorney's Fees [Doc. #201]. On March 22, 2016, this Court granted the motion to comp ...
Warder v. Shaw Grp., Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81822 (E.D. La. June 23, 2016): On March 16, 2016, this Court heard oral argument on Shaw Environmental, Inc.'s Second Motion to Compel [Doc. #200] and Shaw Environmental, Inc.'s Motion for…
Continue Reading

Arbitration — Is It for the Court or Arbitrators to Decide Whether Claim Can Proceed as a Class Claim? — Circuit Split — Incorporation of AAA Rules Dictates Conclusion That Arbitrators Decide

III. Availability of Class Arbitration Hedrick v. BNC Nat’l Bank, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64679 (D. Kan. May 16, 2016): Plaintiff argues that the question of whether his claim can proceed to arbitration as a class claim is a procedural question that the arbitrator, rather than the Court, should decide. Alternat ...
III. Availability of Class Arbitration Hedrick v. BNC Nat’l Bank, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64679 (D. Kan. May 16, 2016): Plaintiff argues that the question of whether his claim can proceed to arbitration as a class claim is a procedural…
Continue Reading

Facebook Admissibility — Reversible Error to Exclude Printout of Authenticated Facebook Messages Even Though Testimony about Them Was Permitted — A Basic Principle of Evidence Law Is That What Is Relevant Is Generally Admissible (Good Quote)

People v. Nunn, 2016 IL App (3d) 140137-U; 2016 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 957 (Ill. Ct. App. May 16, 2017): [*P1]  Held: In a felony murder case in which defendant claimed that the trial court erred in refusing to admit certain documentary evidence at trial, the appellate court agreed and found that the error was not harmless. ...
People v. Nunn, 2016 IL App (3d) 140137-U; 2016 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 957 (Ill. Ct. App. May 16, 2017): [*P1]  Held: In a felony murder case in which defendant claimed that the trial court erred in refusing to admit…
Continue Reading

Rule 16(f) / 37(b) Sanctions — Exclusion of Witness Testimony / Supplemental Expert Opinions Not Disclosed in Compliance with Pretrial Order — 8th Circuit Factors

Amplatz v. Country Mut. Ins. Co., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9540 (8th Cir. May 25, 2016): A jury awarded Maria Amplatz, an insured under a commercial-property insurance policy issued by Country Mutual Insurance Company, $76,065.50 for covered hail and wind damage to the exterior of two properties, but it found that the policy did n ...
Amplatz v. Country Mut. Ins. Co., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9540 (8th Cir. May 25, 2016): A jury awarded Maria Amplatz, an insured under a commercial-property insurance policy issued by Country Mutual Insurance Company, $76,065.50 for covered hail and wind …
Continue Reading

$282,000 in Rule 11, Inherent Power and § 1927 Sanctions Reversed — Colorable Claims in Complex Area of the Law Preclude Any Award

Wolfchild v. Redwood Cnty., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9976 (8th Cir. June 1, 2016): Appellants-plaintiffs filed this purported class action claiming the right to title and possession of twelve square miles of land in southern Minnesota ("twelve square miles"). Specifically, Appellants allege they are lineal descendants o ...
Wolfchild v. Redwood Cnty., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9976 (8th Cir. June 1, 2016): Appellants-plaintiffs filed this purported class action claiming the right to title and possession of twelve square miles of land in southern Minnesota ("twelve square miles"). Specifically, …
Continue Reading

Supreme Court: RICO — § 1962(b) & (c) Extend Extraterritorially ((a) Maybe Not, (d) Maybe So), Depending on Predicates, But Civil Claim Requires Domestic Injury —- Locus of Enterprise Irrelevant; Pattern Is Determinative

RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 3925 (U.S. June 201, 2016): The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§1961-1968, created four new criminal offenses involving the activities of organized criminal groups in relation to an enterprise. §§1962(a)-(d). RICO also created a new civ ...
RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 3925 (U.S. June 201, 2016): The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§1961-1968, created four new criminal offenses involving the activities of organized criminal groups in relation to…
Continue Reading

Email Admissibility: Where Partnership Agreement Requires Unanimity to Sue, Email Exchange Is Inadmissible to Prove What Was Said at Meeting But Admissible to Prove Up the Transaction Represented by the Emails Themselves — I.e., Verbal Act

A partnership agreement between two persons provided that no lawsuit would be maintained without the approval of both. Over the objection of one, the other brought a lawsuit in the name of the partnership against third parties, who now move to dismiss the suit as unauthorized. Subject to certain conditions, their motion is Granted.
A partnership agreement between two persons provided that no lawsuit would be maintained without the approval of both. Over the objection of one, the other brought a lawsuit in the name of the partnership against third parties, who now move…
Continue Reading

Bankruptcy Court May Issue § 1927 Sanctions (Circuit Split); $207K for Delaying Distribution, Eroding Estate; Sanctions from Complaint on OK; Objective Standard Used; Underlying Claim Can Be Legit; No Offset for Client Payment; Specificity Excused

In re Royal Manor Mgmt., Inc. (Grossman v. Wehrle), 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 11018 (6th Cir. June 15, 2016): Dennis Grossman, an attorney who represented claimants pursuing a non-priority unsecured proof of claim in jointly administered Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases, appeals the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's affirmance of the ban ...
In re Royal Manor Mgmt., Inc. (Grossman v. Wehrle), 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 11018 (6th Cir. June 15, 2016): Dennis Grossman, an attorney who represented claimants pursuing a non-priority unsecured proof of claim in jointly administered Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases, …
Continue Reading

$1.5 Million § 1927 / Inherent Power Sanction Reversed — Claim Not Frivolous If Court of Appeals Previously Remanded to Allow Plaintiffs to Amend Complaint — No Evidence of Improper Purpose to Extract Settlement (Why Else Do People Sue?)

U.S. ex rel. Lee v. Corinthian Colleges, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10455 (9th Cir. June 9, 2016): In case number 13-55700, Nyoka Lee and Talala Mshuja ("Relators") appeal the district court's dismissal of their amended complaint alleging violations of the False Claims Act ("FCA") by Corinthian Colleges, Inc. ...
U.S. ex rel. Lee v. Corinthian Colleges, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10455 (9th Cir. June 9, 2016): In case number 13-55700, Nyoka Lee and Talala Mshuja ("Relators") appeal the district court's dismissal of their amended complaint alleging violations of the …
Continue Reading

Inherent Power — Dismissal: Court Must Consider Lesser Sanctions & the Misconduct Must Interfere with the Rightful Decision of the Case — Default: Circuit’s Factors for Lifting Trump Local Rule Criteria

Figueroa v. Cnty. of L.A., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10555 (9th Cir. June 10, 2016):  Sergeant Gonzalez appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for relief from default and the defendants appeal from the district court's grant of attorneys' fees for plaintiff Leocadio Figueroa. Mr. Figueroa appeals from the distr ...
Figueroa v. Cnty. of L.A., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10555 (9th Cir. June 10, 2016):  Sergeant Gonzalez appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for relief from default and the defendants appeal from the district court's grant of…
Continue Reading
Previous162163164165166167168Next

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