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

Inherent Power Sanctions — Suspension/Disbarment Require Clear &Convincing Evidence of Bad Faith, Attorney’s Fees Don’t — Misrepresentation in Defending Partner and Firm in Sanctions Hearing Sanctioned

White v. Regional Adjustment Bureau, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1491 (5th Cir. Jan. 29, 2016) [updated opinion: 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7962] (Note: a related sanctions appeal is excerpted in the posting dated February 11, 2016; both raise the same jurisdictional issue that the Court of Appeals took the appeal before the attorneys' fees were set):
White v. Regional Adjustment Bureau, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1491 (5th Cir. Jan. 29, 2016) [updated opinion: 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7962] (Note: a related sanctions appeal is excerpted in the posting dated February 11, 2016; both raise the same…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Appellate Jurisdiction over Inherent Power Suspension While Attorney’s Fees Unset — Independent Counsel to Pursue IP Sanction If Suspension, Disbarment Possible — Abuse of Discretion Review With a Careful Eye (Good Quote)

White v. Regional Adjustment Bur., Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21023 (5th Cir. Dec. 1, 2015): The underlying dispute in this case concerned claims under consumer protection statutes by Dr. Timothy White, represented by Noah Radbil, against Regional Adjustment Bureau, Inc. ("RAB"). However, this appeal concerns only sanctions ...
White v. Regional Adjustment Bur., Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21023 (5th Cir. Dec. 1, 2015): The underlying dispute in this case concerned claims under consumer protection statutes by Dr. Timothy White, represented by Noah Radbil, against Regional Adjustment Bureau,…
Continue Reading

Collateral Order Doctrine Does Not Permit Appeal of Denial of Motion to Dismiss on Ground Claims Belong in Another Forum (Here, Administrative) — Good Lists of Cases That Collateral Order Doctrine Does, and Does Not, Apply to

Fischer v. NY St. Dept. of Law, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1979 (2d Cir. Feb. 5, 2016): Plaintiff-appellee Carol Fischer is pursuing in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York a claim against defendant-appellant, her former employer--whose proper name is the Division of Appeals and Opinions of the Offi ...
Fischer v. NY St. Dept. of Law, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1979 (2d Cir. Feb. 5, 2016): Plaintiff-appellee Carol Fischer is pursuing in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York a claim against defendant-appellant, her …
Continue Reading

Internet Evidence — Printouts from Third Party, Private Websites (Here, Medical) = Inadmissible Hearsay and Are No Substitute for Expert Testimony on Causation

2. Defendants' Motion to Strike Printouts of Internet Websites [*12]  Hernandez v. Smith, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90740 (E.D. Cal. July 12, 2015): This action is proceeding against Defendants Drs. R. D. Smith and L. Kirk for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's serious medical needs in their treatment ...
2. Defendants' Motion to Strike Printouts of Internet Websites [*12]  Hernandez v. Smith, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90740 (E.D. Cal. July 12, 2015): This action is proceeding against Defendants Drs. R. D. Smith and L. Kirk for deliberate indifference to…
Continue Reading

Recipient of Voicemail May Authenticate It by Memory, Regardless of Existence of Transcript

Pawelczak v. Nations Recovery Ctr., Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82916 (N.D. Ill. June 14, 2012): Pawelczak filed this action against NRC for alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA" or "the Act") 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. Pawelczak alleges that NRC left several message ...
Pawelczak v. Nations Recovery Ctr., Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82916 (N.D. Ill. June 14, 2012): Pawelczak filed this action against NRC for alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA" or "the Act") 15 U.S.C. § 1692,…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions — Vexatious Litigant Restrictions Imposed on Pro Ses Who Filed 3rd Case after 2 Dismissed as Not Properly in Federal Court — Bad Faith Not Essential — OK to Rely on Filings in Other (State) Court to Find Current Filing Sanctionable

Preston v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 190 (10th Cir. Jan. 7, 2016): Isaiah Preston, Jr. and Donetta Preston appeal from the district court's dismissal of their federal lawsuit and imposition of filing restrictions. [*2]  Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. ...
Preston v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 190 (10th Cir. Jan. 7, 2016): Isaiah Preston, Jr. and Donetta Preston appeal from the district court's dismissal of their federal lawsuit and imposition of filing restrictions. [*2]  Exercising jurisdiction under 28…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — State Agency Regulations (Hunting Policies) from Agency Website

Safari Club Int’l v. Harris, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1349 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2016): Plaintiff states in its FAC: "In this lawsuit, Plaintiff . . . challenges the State of California's [statutory] ban on the importation, transportation, and possession in California of mountain lions hunted outside of California" (referred ...
Safari Club Int’l v. Harris, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1349 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2016): Plaintiff states in its FAC: "In this lawsuit, Plaintiff . . . challenges the State of California's [statutory] ban on the importation, transportation, and possession…
Continue Reading

Should Class Certification Be Decided Before Standing? Circuit Split

Richards v. Direct Energy Servs., LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157071 (D. Conn. Nov. 20, 2015): 1   The Court notes that there appears to be a Circuit split between the Seventh and Second Circuit on the issue of whether class certification should be decided before standing. See 6803 Boulevard East, LLC v. DIRECTV, ...
Richards v. Direct Energy Servs., LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157071 (D. Conn. Nov. 20, 2015): 1   The Court notes that there appears to be a Circuit split between the Seventh and Second Circuit on the issue of whether class …
Continue Reading

Facebook Messages Authenticated by Fact They Were Sent to/from Defendant’s Account, His Instructions to Witness to Delete Some of Them and His Acting in Accordance with Plans Exchanged in Them

People v. Holwerda, 2015 Mich. App. LEXIS 2310 (Mich. Ct. App. Dec. 10, 2015): Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of three counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-III), MCL 750.520d(1)(a) (sexual penetration with a victim between 13 and 16 years of age). The trial court sentenced defendant as an habit ...
People v. Holwerda, 2015 Mich. App. LEXIS 2310 (Mich. Ct. App. Dec. 10, 2015): Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of three counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC-III), MCL 750.520d(1)(a) (sexual penetration with a victim between 13 and…
Continue Reading

RICO — Neither Shareholder Nor Creditor Has Standing to Sue for Injuries Resulting from Injury Sustained in First Instance by Corporation

Harris v. Orange S.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 22905 (11th Cir. Dec. 30, 2015): Marcia Harris appeals the district court's dismissal of her complaint against Orange Business Services U.S., Inc. ("OBS"), a Delaware corporation located in Georgia; Orange S.A. ("Orange"), a corporation located in France; Almerys S.A. ...
Harris v. Orange S.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 22905 (11th Cir. Dec. 30, 2015): Marcia Harris appeals the district court's dismissal of her complaint against Orange Business Services U.S., Inc. ("OBS"), a Delaware corporation located in Georgia; Orange S.A. ("Orange"),…
Continue Reading
Previous176177178179180181182Next

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