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

§ 1927 Sanctions: Bad Faith Shown by Pressing Anew Frivolous Arguments Rejected by Other Courts — Recusal: Unsubstantiated Suggestions Insufficient; Probability of Actual Bias Must Be Too High to Be Constitutionally Intolerable

In re Hartford Litigation Cases, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 4820 (9th Cir. Mar. 16, 2016): Plaintiffs Lisa, Cornelius, and Marian Turner ("the Turners") appeal the denial of their motions to disqualify Judge Percy Anderson, the district court's orders remanding the case to state court, the denial of their motion to reopen prev ...
In re Hartford Litigation Cases, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 4820 (9th Cir. Mar. 16, 2016): Plaintiffs Lisa, Cornelius, and Marian Turner ("the Turners") appeal the denial of their motions to disqualify Judge Percy Anderson, the district court's orders remanding the…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Third Party Comments Posted on Government Website Not Subject to Judicial Notice for Their Truth; Only for Fact They Were Made

Tri Union Frozen Prods., Inc. v. United States, 2016 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 21 (U.S. Ct. Int’l Trade Mar. 7, 2016): This matter is before the court on a motion for judicial notice filed by Consolidated Plaintiffs Vietnam Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers and certain of its individual member companies (collectively " ...
Tri Union Frozen Prods., Inc. v. United States, 2016 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 21 (U.S. Ct. Int’l Trade Mar. 7, 2016): This matter is before the court on a motion for judicial notice filed by Consolidated Plaintiffs Vietnam Association of…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Failure of Notice (Due Process) Harmless If Args. Addressed on Reconsideration — No Need to Consider Lesser Sanctions for Lying to Court As No One Needs to Be Warned About That — No Hearing Needed If Blatant Inconsistency (Good Quotes)

Ayoubi v. Dart, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 3983 (7th Cir. Feb. 11, 2016): Firas Ayoubi, a pretrial detainee at the Cook County Jail, sued several members of the jail's staff under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violating the Eighth Amendment by punching him and ignoring his resulting chest pains. Four months after he sued, the judge found that, ...
Ayoubi v. Dart, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 3983 (7th Cir. Feb. 11, 2016): Firas Ayoubi, a pretrial detainee at the Cook County Jail, sued several members of the jail's staff under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violating the Eighth Amendment…
Continue Reading

Federal Jurisdiction — Is a Motion to Remand Case Dispositive or Does a Magistrate Judge Have Authority to Rule on It? — Circuit Split

Harris v. MLB Consulting, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21000 (D. N.D. Jan. 12, 2016): 1   In light of a split among court decisions as to whether motions to remand are case-dispositive--and the resulting disagreement over the authority of a magistrate judge to rule on those motions--this opinion is filed as a report and recomm ...
Harris v. MLB Consulting, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21000 (D. N.D. Jan. 12, 2016): 1   In light of a split among court decisions as to whether motions to remand are case-dispositive–and the resulting disagreement over the authority of a …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Bureau of Labor Statistics Survey on Website Is Self-Authenticating under 902(5) and Bears Distinctive Characteristics of Agency’s Website within 901

Rizo v. Yovino, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163849 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2015): IV. EVIDENTIARY MATTERS A. Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice Plaintiff asks the Court to take judicial notice of the United [*12]  States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics& ...
Rizo v. Yovino, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163849 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2015): IV. EVIDENTIARY MATTERS A. Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice Plaintiff asks the Court to take judicial notice of the United [*12]  States Department of Labor Bureau of …
Continue Reading

Disqualification — Ruling on Motion to Disqualify Counsel Not Disturbed on Appeal If the Record Reveals Any Sound Basis for the District Court’s Action (Good Quote)

Beaty v. Hoa, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4640 (9th Cir. Mar. 20, 2015): The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Beaty's motions for disqualification of opposing counsel because the record supports the denial. See Cohn v. Rosenfeld, 733 F.2d 625, 631 (9th Cir. 1984) (this court "will ...
Beaty v. Hoa, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4640 (9th Cir. Mar. 20, 2015): The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Beaty's motions for disqualification of opposing counsel because the record supports the denial. See Cohn v. Rosenfeld,…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Rule 11 — Bad Faith Is an Objective Standard That Is Met If Conduct Is Objectively Reckless or Outside the Bounds of Acceptable Conduct

Odion v. Google Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 17427 (11th Cir. Oct. 5, 2015): We review for abuse of discretion a district court's ruling on a motion for sanctions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Massengale v. Ray, 267 F.3d 1298, 1301 (11th Cir. 2001) (per curiam). Rule 11 sanctions ...
Odion v. Google Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 17427 (11th Cir. Oct. 5, 2015): We review for abuse of discretion a district court's ruling on a motion for sanctions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See…
Continue Reading

Do Iqbal and Twombly Apply to Affirmative Defenses? (Circuit Split) — Affirmative Defenses Fail If So Unrelated to the Claims As to Be Unworthy of Any Consideration (Good Quote)

Two Cases on the Circuit Split: 1.  Sodexo Mgmt., Inc. v. Benton Harbor Area Sch. Dist., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26115 (W.D. Mich. Mar. 2, 2016): Initially, the parties' disagreement about the sufficiency of BHASD's affirmative defenses requires the Court to weigh in on whether the pleading stand ...
Two Cases on the Circuit Split: 1.  Sodexo Mgmt., Inc. v. Benton Harbor Area Sch. Dist., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26115 (W.D. Mich. Mar. 2, 2016): Initially, the parties' disagreement about the sufficiency of BHASD's affirmative defenses requires the Court …
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Monetary Sanction in the Amount of Extra Discovery Costs Caused by Spoliation

Herson v. City of Richmond, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1134 (9th Cir. Jan. 22, 2016): 4. Finally, the district court did not err in granting the City's motion for sanctions. Courts may impose monetary sanctions in [*4]  the amount of extra discovery costs caused by spoliation, including the cost of the sanctions motion.
Herson v. City of Richmond, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1134 (9th Cir. Jan. 22, 2016): 4. Finally, the district court did not err in granting the City's motion for sanctions. Courts may impose monetary sanctions in [*4]  the amount of …
Continue Reading

Class Actions — What Does Predominance Mean and How Is It Properly Analyzed? — Circuit Split — Can Subclasses & Issue Certification Help? — Another Circuit Split) — Impact of Damages on Predominance

Daye v. Community Fin. Serv. Ctrs., LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26539 (D. N.M. Feb. 9, 2016): There is little uniform guidance on how to assess when common issues predominate over individual ones. Moreover, there is currently a split of authority between the United States Courts of Appeals over the proper way to analyze predomi ...
Daye v. Community Fin. Serv. Ctrs., LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26539 (D. N.M. Feb. 9, 2016): There is little uniform guidance on how to assess when common issues predominate over individual ones. Moreover, there is currently a split of …
Continue Reading
Previous172173174175176177178Next

Recent Posts

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Default Judgment Appropriate Only As a Last Resort, When Less Drastic Sanctions Would Not Ensure Compliance with the Court’s Orders — (2) Default Judgment Sanction Requires Willful or Bad Faith Failure to Obey Discovery Order — (3) Fugitive Defendant’s Failure to Appear at Court-Ordered, Remote Deposition Despite Court Warning That Sanctions Could Follow Disobedience Warrants Default Judgment — (4) District Court Afforded Wide Discretion in Interpreting Its Own Orders — (5) Filing a Notice of Appeal from a Non-Appealable Order (Here, a Discovery Order) Does Not Deprive the District Court of Jurisdiction over the Case

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.”

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