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

Email Evidence — Circumstantial Authentication (7th Circuit)

Finnegan v. Myers, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119517 (N.D. Ind. Sept. 8, 2015): This matter is before the Court on Defendant Laskey's Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Defendant, Antoinette Laskey, on October 6, 2014 (DE #195), and Defendant Laskey's Motion to Strike Inadmissible Testimony and Documents from Plaintiffs' Des ...
Finnegan v. Myers, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119517 (N.D. Ind. Sept. 8, 2015): This matter is before the Court on Defendant Laskey's Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Defendant, Antoinette Laskey, on October 6, 2014 (DE #195), and Defendant Laskey's…
Continue Reading

Attorney Discipline — Court of Appeals Reviews De Novo Whether Conduct Is Subject to Sanction — Choice of Sanction Reviewed for Abuse of Discretion

In re Booker, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 22127 (5th Cir. Dec. 18, 2015): Robert Booker was suspended from the roll of attorneys admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (the "Eastern District") for three years. In June 2015, Booker appealed that suspension, claiming the dis ...
In re Booker, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 22127 (5th Cir. Dec. 18, 2015): Robert Booker was suspended from the roll of attorneys admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (the "Eastern District") …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — “This Appeal … Can Only Be Described as an Exercise in Chutzpah” (Good Quote) — Bankruptcy Court Has Authority to Dismiss a Chapter 7 Case for Cause for Bad Faith Litigation Abuse

Krueger v. Torres (In re Krueger), 812 F.3d 365 (5th Cir. Tex. Jan. 19, 2016): This appeal of a bankruptcy court decision dismissing a chapter 7 case "for cause" can only be described as an exercise in chutzpah. The debtor flagrantly and repeatedly abused bankruptcy and court processes to retain a ...
Krueger v. Torres (In re Krueger), 812 F.3d 365 (5th Cir. Tex. Jan. 19, 2016): This appeal of a bankruptcy court decision dismissing a chapter 7 case "for cause" can only be described as an exercise in chutzpah.…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Appellate Court’s Taking Notice of Ongoing Proceedings in Lower Court Is Consistent with Its Authority to Require Supplementation of the Record and to Issue a Writ for Such Records

Matter of MKT, 2016 OK 4; 2016 Okla. LEXIS 6 (Okla. Sup. Ct. Jan. 20, 2016): The district court ordered the transfer of a minor child, S.A.W., to a foster-adoption home that was in compliance with the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Oklahoma Indian Child Welfare Act [IWCA], and in the bests interests of the child. Foster mother, natu ...
Matter of MKT, 2016 OK 4; 2016 Okla. LEXIS 6 (Okla. Sup. Ct. Jan. 20, 2016): The district court ordered the transfer of a minor child, S.A.W., to a foster-adoption home that was in compliance with the Indian Child Welfare…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions for Filing 3rd & 4th Amended Complaints That Added 131 Pages of Text and 402 Pages of Exhibits Stating No New Claims and Only Marginally Pertinent to Existing Claims — Also, No RICO Causation

Mack v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 706 (11th Cir. Jan. 15, 2016): Plaintiffs Olivia Jiheekim Mack ("Mack") and David Mack, proceeding pro se, appeal the district court's dismissal of Mack's amended complaint against Mack's employer, Delta Air Lines, Inc. ("Delta"), and against Sedgewick ...
Mack v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 706 (11th Cir. Jan. 15, 2016): Plaintiffs Olivia Jiheekim Mack ("Mack") and David Mack, proceeding pro se, appeal the district court's dismissal of Mack's amended complaint against Mack's employer, Delta…
Continue Reading

FRAP 38 Sanctions Not Lightly Invoked — Law Allows for Reasonable Disagreements (Good Quotes) — Mistaken Labeling of Motion as Rule 11 Forgiven — Ignored District Court Warning Case Was Unreasonable & Vexatious

CFE Grp., LLC v. FirstMerit Bank, N.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 22914 (7th Cir. Dec. 31, 2015): The principal question in this appeal is whether the district court correctly refused to enjoin a state court from adjudicating a case that the state-court plaintiff had voluntarily dismissed in an earlier incarnation in federal court. In the ...
CFE Grp., LLC v. FirstMerit Bank, N.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 22914 (7th Cir. Dec. 31, 2015): The principal question in this appeal is whether the district court correctly refused to enjoin a state court from adjudicating a case that…
Continue Reading

District Court Is Bound to Follow the Law of Its Circuit and Is Not to Resolve Circuit Splits (Good Quote)

Harris v. Warden, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172172 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 28, 2015): This Court is bound to follow the law of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Zuniga v. United Can Co., 812 F.2d 443, 450 (9th Cir. 1987) (recognizing that [*12]  district courts are "bound by the law of their own circuit," and &quo ...
Harris v. Warden, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172172 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 28, 2015): This Court is bound to follow the law of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Zuniga v. United Can Co., 812 F.2d 443, 450 (9th Cir. 1987)…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court: Unaccepted Offer of Judgment or Contractual Offer Doesn’t Moot Case (Here, Class Action) — Does Deposit of Full Amount? — Must Liability Be Admitted? — Must Court Enter Judgment for Plaintiff?

Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 846 (U.S. Jan. 20, 2016): Is an unaccepted offer to satisfy the named plaintiff's individual claim sufficient to render a case moot when the complaint seeks relief on behalf of the plaintiff and a class of persons similarly situated? This question, on which Courts of Ap ...
Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 846 (U.S. Jan. 20, 2016): Is an unaccepted offer to satisfy the named plaintiff's individual claim sufficient to render a case moot when the complaint seeks relief on behalf of the plaintiff and …
Continue Reading

Are Life Settlements Securities? — Circuit Split

SEC v. Pacific West Capital Grp., Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174800 (C.D. Cal. June 16, 2015): Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order Re: Motion for Preliminary Injunction Having reviewed and considered all the briefing filed with respect to plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction ("Motion"), the ...
SEC v. Pacific West Capital Grp., Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174800 (C.D. Cal. June 16, 2015): Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order Re: Motion for Preliminary Injunction Having reviewed and considered all the briefing filed with respect to plaintiff's Motion for…
Continue Reading

Contents of Website Incorporated by Reference in Complaint May Be Considered on Motion to Dismiss — Case Law Split

Mophie, Inc. v. Shah, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185203 (C.D. Cal. July 24, 2014): 2   The Court considers this evidence of the Living Social policy on its website because the TAC relies on LivingSocial's website (TAC ¶ 38, Exh. 21; ¶ 41, Exh. 23 (LivingSocial's terms and conditions from its website) an ...
Mophie, Inc. v. Shah, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185203 (C.D. Cal. July 24, 2014): 2   The Court considers this evidence of the Living Social policy on its website because the TAC relies on LivingSocial's website (TAC ¶ 38, Exh. 21;…
Continue Reading
Previous178179180181182183184Next

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