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 Sanctions — Prevailing Party Ordered to Pay $135,000 in Attorney’s Fees for Discovery Violations — Meet-and-Confer Requirement Satisfied in Part by Email Communications and Calls

Houston v. C.G. Security Servs., Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7473 (7th Cir. Apr. 25, 2016): This appeal arises out of a lawsuit brought by plaintiff-appellee Angel Houston, who sustained injuries from a fall during a New Year's Eve party at a Hyatt hotel in Indianapolis. Defendant-appellant C.G. Security Services, Inc. ("C.G.& ...
Houston v. C.G. Security Servs., Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7473 (7th Cir. Apr. 25, 2016): This appeal arises out of a lawsuit brought by plaintiff-appellee Angel Houston, who sustained injuries from a fall during a New Year's Eve party…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court — Jurisdiction under §27 of Exchange Act = §1331 Arising Under: Either Federal Law Creates Claim or Grable — Use of 1927-1933 Dictionaries to Construe 1934 Statute — Good Quote on State Court Comity

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Manning, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 3049 (U.S. May 16, 2016): Section 27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), 48 Stat. 992, as amended, 15 U. S. C. §78a, et seq., grants federal district courts exclusive jurisdiction "of all suits in equity and actions at law ...
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Manning, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 3049 (U.S. May 16, 2016): Section 27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), 48 Stat. 992, as amended, 15 U. S. C. §78a, et seq., …
Continue Reading

Motions to Dismiss — Mere Mention of Document in Complaint Doesn’t Make It Integral or Usable on 12(b)(6) Motion — Reference to Another Lawsuit Doesn’t Incorporate All Litigation Documents — RICO Untimeliness Dismissal Reversed

Goel v. Bunge, Ltd., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7678 (2d Cir. Apr. 28, 2106): Plaintiffs-appellants Vikas Goel and Rainforest Trading Ltd. (jointly, "plaintiffs") appeal August 7, 2015 and August 27, 2015 judgments of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Katherine B. Forrest, Judge) di ...
Goel v. Bunge, Ltd., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7678 (2d Cir. Apr. 28, 2106): Plaintiffs-appellants Vikas Goel and Rainforest Trading Ltd. (jointly, "plaintiffs") appeal August 7, 2015 and August 27, 2015 judgments of the United States District Court for the …
Continue Reading

Rule 16(f) Sanctions — Dismissal for Failure to Pay Attorney’s Fees Ordered as Prior 16(f) Sanction — Corporation May Not Appear Pro Se

Bolus v. Fleetwood RV, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7418 (4th Cir. Apr. 25, 2016): Robert Bolus and Bolus Truck Sales & Center, Inc. (Bolus) appeal the district court's order dismissing his suit for failure to comply with an order to pay Appellees' attorney's fees.  [Ed. note:  This prior order wa ...
Bolus v. Fleetwood RV, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7418 (4th Cir. Apr. 25, 2016): Robert Bolus and Bolus Truck Sales & Center, Inc. (Bolus) appeal the district court's order dismissing his suit for failure to comply with an order …
Continue Reading

Facebook Authentication Insufficient — Expert Pulled Metadata from One Side of Chat But, Because Conversants Were No Longer “Friends” Then, Data Showed Unknown Account as Source of Messages — Expert Admits Messages Could’ve Been Altered

Adoption of Nash, 2016 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 520 (Mass. Ct. App. May 12, 2016): The mother appeals from a decree issued by a judge of the Juvenile Court determining that the best interests of her son, Nash, would be served by the termination of the mother's parental rights. See G. L. c. 119, § 26; G. L. c. ...
Adoption of Nash, 2016 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 520 (Mass. Ct. App. May 12, 2016): The mother appeals from a decree issued by a judge of the Juvenile Court determining that the best interests of her son, Nash, would be …
Continue Reading

Service of Process: Rule 4(d) Does Not Impose Duty to Pay Costs on Foreign Party Who Declines to Accept Service — Sanctions: No FRAP 38 or § 1927 Sanctions for Appeal That Is Weak But Not Frivolous

Cox v. Koninklijke Philips, NV, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 8688 (6th Cir. May 9, 2016): Former employees at a glass and bulb manufacturing plant brought this action against their employer, Philips Electronics North America Corporation ("Philips"), and its Dutch parent company, Koninklijke Philips, N.V. ("KPNV"), for inj ...
Cox v. Koninklijke Philips, NV, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 8688 (6th Cir. May 9, 2016): Former employees at a glass and bulb manufacturing plant brought this action against their employer, Philips Electronics North America Corporation ("Philips"), and its Dutch parent…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions: Plaintiff’s Testimony That He Visited & Photographed Premises, When In Fact His Lawyer Did, Leading to over 100 Revisions on Dep Errata Sheet = Bad Faith, Leads to Dismissal

Vogel v. Tulaphorn, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2916 (9th Cir. Feb. 17, 2016): Martin Vogel and his attorney Lynn Hubbard III appeal the district court's order granting terminating sanctions.1 We affirm. 1   Vogel additionally appeals the district court's orders awarding attorneys& ...
Vogel v. Tulaphorn, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2916 (9th Cir. Feb. 17, 2016): Martin Vogel and his attorney Lynn Hubbard III appeal the district court's order granting terminating sanctions.1 We affirm. 1   Vogel additionally appeals the district court's orders…
Continue Reading

Wayback Machine — Rejecting Multiple Arguments Against Admissibility — Accepting Butler’s Testimony & Taking Judicial Notice — Even If Wayback Machine Doesn’t Always Capture All Info on a Site, It Never Adds Info That Wasn’t on the Site

Marten Transport, Ltd v PlattForm Advertising, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57471 (D. Kan. Apr. 29, 2016): By this Memorandum and Order, the Court overrules defendant PlattForm's written objection to plaintiff Marten's designation of deposition testimony by Christopher Butler (Doc. # 167), and it grants Marten's mot ...
Marten Transport, Ltd v PlattForm Advertising, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57471 (D. Kan. Apr. 29, 2016): By this Memorandum and Order, the Court overrules defendant PlattForm's written objection to plaintiff Marten's designation of deposition testimony by Christopher Butler (Doc. …
Continue Reading

Sanctions: $75 Million Default Jmt for Discovery Violations — Jurisdiction vs Merits — If Court Has Jurisdiction, It Has Inherent Power to Impose Civil Contempt — Law of the Case on Appeal: Failure to Raise Issue on Prior Appeal = Waiver

Angiodynamics v. Biolitiec AG, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 8443 (1st Cir. May 6, 2016): Defendants, who violated a preliminary injunction, appealed the resulting civil contempt order entered by the district court. The contempt order included a civil arrest warrant and an escalating fines provision. Defendants persisted in their defiance as t ...
Angiodynamics v. Biolitiec AG, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 8443 (1st Cir. May 6, 2016): Defendants, who violated a preliminary injunction, appealed the resulting civil contempt order entered by the district court. The contempt order included a civil arrest warrant and…
Continue Reading

Federal Court Clerks Have Absolute Quasi-Judicial Immunity from Damages when Performing Tasks Integral to the Judicial Process unless They Act in the Clear Absence of All Jurisdiction

Cobb v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 2867 (9th Cir. Feb. 26, 2015): The district court properly dismissed Cobb's claims against the federal court defendants because they are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity. See Mullis v. U.S. Bankr. Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1390 (9th Cir. 1987) ("C ...
Cobb v. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 2867 (9th Cir. Feb. 26, 2015): The district court properly dismissed Cobb's claims against the federal court defendants because they are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity. See Mullis v. U.S. Bankr.…
Continue Reading
Previous166167168169170171172Next

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