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

Voicemail Admissibility — Rule 801(d)(2)(C) — Voicemail Left by A Purportedly on B’s Behalf Is Hearsay Absent Independent Proof That A Was an Agent of Or Was Otherwise Authorized by B to Leave the Voicemail

State v. Davis, 2016 Ariz. App. Unpub. LEXIS 323 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2016): P1 Following a jury trial, Mohammed Davis was convicted of three counts of aggravated harassment. On appeal, Davis argues the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of prior bad acts, denying his motion to sever offenses, ...
State v. Davis, 2016 Ariz. App. Unpub. LEXIS 323 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2016): P1 Following a jury trial, Mohammed Davis was convicted of three counts of aggravated harassment. On appeal, Davis argues the trial court abused its discretion…
Continue Reading

Disqualification — Lower Court Affirmed If Record Reveals Any Sound Basis for Its Action (Good Quote) — Denial of Sanctions Appropriate Where Written Discovery Corrected Incorrect Aspects of 26(a) Disclosures

Garcia v. Johnson, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 19786 (9th Cir. Nov. 13, 2015): This appeal arises from the District Court's grant of summary judgment to Defendant-Appellee Jeh Johnson, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS" or "Defendant"), and denial of several other motions. Plaintiff-Appellant Stev ...
Garcia v. Johnson, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 19786 (9th Cir. Nov. 13, 2015): This appeal arises from the District Court's grant of summary judgment to Defendant-Appellee Jeh Johnson, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS" or "Defendant"), and denial…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Deliberately Disobeying Order = Bad Faith for Inherent Power — Appeals: Appellant May Not Incorporate by Reference Arguments Made Below — Ethical Violations Bar Service As Qui Tam Relator

U.S. ex rel. Holmes v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 5370 (5th Cir. Mar. 23, 2016): Plaintiff-Appellant Donald Holmes brought this qui tam action as relator for the Government under the False Claims Act. He appeals the district court's order disqualifying him from serving as a relator in the suit and dismissing
U.S. ex rel. Holmes v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 5370 (5th Cir. Mar. 23, 2016): Plaintiff-Appellant Donald Holmes brought this qui tam action as relator for the Government under the False Claims Act. He appeals the district…
Continue Reading

Voicemail Admissibility — Victim’s Voicemail to Girlfriend Prior to Attack Relevant to His State of Mind & Issue of Who Was the Aggressor, Thus Not Hearsay

People v. Martinez, 2016 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 927 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2016): A jury convicted defendant Roberto Jaime Martinez of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)) and possession of a concealed dirk or dagger (former § 12020, subd. (a)(4)). As to the murder, the jury found true ...
People v. Martinez, 2016 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 927 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2016): A jury convicted defendant Roberto Jaime Martinez of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)) and possession of a concealed dirk or dagger …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Wayback Machine

Hepp v. Ultra Green Energy Servs., LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34953 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 18, 2016):   Defendant Ultra Green Energy Services LLC ("Ultra Green") moves this Court for a new trial pursuant to Rule 59(a) or for an order altering or amending its judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e). For the reasons ...
Hepp v. Ultra Green Energy Servs., LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34953 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 18, 2016):   Defendant Ultra Green Energy Services LLC ("Ultra Green") moves this Court for a new trial pursuant to Rule 59(a) or for an order…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Vexatious Litigant Injunction Must Allow Enjoinee to Seek Permission for Additional Filings (Even If He’s Up to His Sixth Amended Complaint) and Can’t Shut Him Down Categorically

Gottlieb v. Ford, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2330 (2d Cir. Feb. 11, 2016): UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED in part and VACATED and REMANDED in part. Plaintiff-Appellant Allen Gottlieb ("Gottl ...
Gottlieb v. Ford, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2330 (2d Cir. Feb. 11, 2016): UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED in part and VACATED and REMANDED in part.…
Continue Reading

Twitter Admissibility — Third-Party Tweets = Hearsay on Issue of Actual Confusion in Trademark Dispute Absent Authentication from Declarants

Ponelman v. Nike, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17662 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 9, 2016): Daniel Poneman ("Plaintiff") brings suit against Nike, Inc. ("Nike"), and Footlocker, Inc. ("Foot Locker"), (collectively "Defendants") for trademark infringement related to his "SwagAir" mark pursuan ...
Ponelman v. Nike, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17662 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 9, 2016): Daniel Poneman ("Plaintiff") brings suit against Nike, Inc. ("Nike"), and Footlocker, Inc. ("Foot Locker"), (collectively "Defendants") for trademark infringement related to his "SwagAir" mark pursuant to …
Continue Reading

Removal: Does Voluntary Removal by State Defendants Waive Eleventh Amendment Immunity? — Circuit Split

Singleton v. Commonwealth of Ky., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43383 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 31, 2016): To the extent the Singletons argue these parties waived their Eleventh Amendment immunity by removing this suit to federal court, the Court disagrees. The circuit courts are split as to whether voluntarily removing a lawsuit to federal cour ...
Singleton v. Commonwealth of Ky., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43383 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 31, 2016): To the extent the Singletons argue these parties waived their Eleventh Amendment immunity by removing this suit to federal court, the Court disagrees. The circuit …
Continue Reading

Which Party Bears the Burden of Proof of Establishing Personal Jurisdiction on a Rule 60(b) Motion to Lift a Default Judgment? — Circuit Split

Frenkel v. Klein, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35826 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 21, 2016): Leon Frenkel sued Defendants Bruce Klein and Victory Partners LLC ("VPLLC") in 2014 for breach of contract, and on August 11, 2014, this Court entered a default judgment against Defendants. More than a year later, Defendants filed a Motion to Set Aside t ...
Frenkel v. Klein, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35826 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 21, 2016): Leon Frenkel sued Defendants Bruce Klein and Victory Partners LLC ("VPLLC") in 2014 for breach of contract, and on August 11, 2014, this Court entered a default…
Continue Reading

Appeals — Court of Appeals May, But Generally Will Not, Affirm on Other Grounds Supported by Record But Not Considered by District Court — Inherent Power Sanctions Should First Be Sought in Lower Court

Zappulla v. Annucci, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 4089 (2d Cir. Mar. 4, 2016): Plaintiff Guy Zappulla appeals from a summary judgment award in favor of defendants Anthony J. Annucci and Carl Koenigsmann on Zappulla's claims that his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by inadequate medical treatment while in the custody o ...
Zappulla v. Annucci, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 4089 (2d Cir. Mar. 4, 2016): Plaintiff Guy Zappulla appeals from a summary judgment award in favor of defendants Anthony J. Annucci and Carl Koenigsmann on Zappulla's claims that his Eighth and Fourteenth…
Continue Reading
Previous169170171172173174175Next

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