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

Spoliation Sanctions — Sixth Circuit Test — To Prove Relevance, Movant Must Show Destroyed Evidence Was of Nature Alleged, Not Just Satisfy Rule 401 — Meaning of Abuse of Discretion

Yoder & Frey Auctioneers, Inc. v. EquipmentFacts, LLC, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24301 (6th Cir. Dec. 22, 2014): Defendant, EquipmentFacts, LLC ("Efacts"), appeals from the judgment entered by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio imposing liability and damages in a civil suit brought by Plain ...
Yoder & Frey Auctioneers, Inc. v. EquipmentFacts, LLC, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24301 (6th Cir. Dec. 22, 2014): Defendant, EquipmentFacts, LLC ("Efacts"), appeals from the judgment entered by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio imposing …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Barring Litigant from Submitting Evidence at Summary Judgment under Rules 37 and 16(f) for Disobeying Orders and Failing to Attend Scheduled Conferences

Lasisi v. Follett Higher Education Grp., Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 142 (7th Cir. Jan. 6, 2015): case ended at summary judgment. Follett moved to strike Lasisi's evidence and statement of facts as a sanction for his failure to answer discovery, as earlier recommended by the magistrate judge. The district judge accepted the recomme ...
Lasisi v. Follett Higher Education Grp., Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 142 (7th Cir. Jan. 6, 2015): case ended at summary judgment. Follett moved to strike Lasisi's evidence and statement of facts as a sanction for his failure to answer…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Dismissal under Rule 37 Is Extreme, Reserved for Flagrant Cases of Bad Faith — 4th Circuit’s 4-Factor Test — Lesser Sanctions Should Be Considered

Kelly v. Suntrust Bank, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 124 (4th Cir. Jan. 6, 2015): Freddie J. Kelly appeals the district court's order dismissing with prejudice his action against SunTrust Bank and credit reporting agencies Equifax Information Services LLC, Experian Information Solutions, and TransUnion LLC. The district court dismissed Ke ...
Kelly v. Suntrust Bank, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 124 (4th Cir. Jan. 6, 2015): Freddie J. Kelly appeals the district court's order dismissing with prejudice his action against SunTrust Bank and credit reporting agencies Equifax Information Services LLC, Experian Information…
Continue Reading

Former Employee of Adversary as Adverse Party under Rule 611(c)(2)

See Jaffe v. Bank of Am., N.A., 395 Fed. App’x 583, 588–89 (11th Cir. 2010) (“Although Ross left Bank of America four years before the trial commenced, he was a[n] . . .  employee when the alleged misrepresentations may have occurred, and Bank of America's counsel represented him personally throughout the litigation.  Thus, Ross was in fact a ...
See Jaffe v. Bank of Am., N.A., 395 Fed. App’x 583, 588–89 (11th Cir. 2010) (“Although Ross left Bank of America four years before the trial commenced, he was a[n] . . .  employee when the alleged misrepresentations may have…
Continue Reading

No RICO Continuity Where Predicates Are Part of Single, Otherwise Lawful Transaction — Outside Lawyers Don’t Operate / Manage Client — No Liability for Routine Legal Services — Contract Claim in RICO Garb (Good Quotes)

Zastrow v. Houston Auto Imports Greenway Ltd., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 9918 (5th Cir. June 12, 2015): Plaintiffs-Appellants Mark Zastrow and his company Heights Autohaus (collectively, "Zastrow") appeal from the district court's grant of summary judgment on their claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizatio ...
Zastrow v. Houston Auto Imports Greenway Ltd., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 9918 (5th Cir. June 12, 2015): Plaintiffs-Appellants Mark Zastrow and his company Heights Autohaus (collectively, "Zastrow") appeal from the district court's grant of summary judgment on their claims under…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Governmental vs. Non-Governmental, Including Parties’, Websites — Purpose & Extent of Notice

Gerritsen v. Warner Bros. Entm’t Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84978 (C.D. Cal. Jan 30, 2015): On April 29, 2014, Terry T. Gerritsen filed this action against Katja Motion Picture Corporation ("Katja"), New Line Productions, Inc. ("New Line"), and Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. ("WB") (collectively, &qu ...
Gerritsen v. Warner Bros. Entm’t Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84978 (C.D. Cal. Jan 30, 2015): On April 29, 2014, Terry T. Gerritsen filed this action against Katja Motion Picture Corporation ("Katja"), New Line Productions, Inc. ("New Line"), and Warner…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Website Information as to Origins of, and Private v. Public Ownership of, Corporation to Determine Status as State Actor under § 1983 — When Is a Corporation a State Actor? — Factors

Guo v. Independent Chinese Ctr., Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108294 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 13, 2015): In this action, Plaintiff pro se, Zhi Guo, asserts civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and a pendent state law claim against Independent Chinese Pen Center, Inc. ("ICPC"), National Endowment for Dem ...
Guo v. Independent Chinese Ctr., Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108294 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 13, 2015): In this action, Plaintiff pro se, Zhi Guo, asserts civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and a pendent state law claim against Independent …
Continue Reading

No Rule 11 Sanctions for Derogatory Language in Brief Not Unfounded Legally or Factually — No § 1927 Sanctions for Failure to Grant Extension to File Brief — Local Rules, Judicial Discretion Determine Due Date

Waite v VCG Clark Cnty. Collection Serv., LLC, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4934 (9th Cir. Mar. 26, 2015): Waite also contends that the district court erred in denying her motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. That motion was premised on the contention that CCCS made false, unfounded, and offensive allegations i ...
Waite v VCG Clark Cnty. Collection Serv., LLC, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4934 (9th Cir. Mar. 26, 2015): Waite also contends that the district court erred in denying her motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.…
Continue Reading

Text / Email Authentication — Conduct Pursuant to Text Exchange Sufficient to Authenticate Disputed Texts — Authentication Issue Is for Jury — Court Need Not Be Persuaded Texts Are Authentic — Texts as Admissions

Cook v. State, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 2649 (Tex. Ct. App. Mar. 20, 2015): Appellant's conviction for cocaine delivery arises out of Appellant's sale of drugs to a confidential informant. The confidential informant, Lindsey Ford, testified that she had used and sold drugs in the past and that she was familiar with who sol ...
Cook v. State, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 2649 (Tex. Ct. App. Mar. 20, 2015): Appellant's conviction for cocaine delivery arises out of Appellant's sale of drugs to a confidential informant. The confidential informant, Lindsey Ford, testified that she had used …
Continue Reading

Internet Authentication — Chat Logs — Chats on Alleged Speaker’s Password-Protected Computer; He Has Exclusive Possession; Chat Name = His First Name + Characters Extremely Similar to His Email Address

People v. Carothers, 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5414 (Cal. Ct. App. July 31, 2015): A jury found defendant James Carothers guilty of possessing child pornography. (Pen. Code, § 311.11, subd. (a).) The trial court granted a five-year term of probation and imposed probation conditions including one year in county jail and the requirem ...
People v. Carothers, 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5414 (Cal. Ct. App. July 31, 2015): A jury found defendant James Carothers guilty of possessing child pornography. (Pen. Code, § 311.11, subd. (a).) The trial court granted a five-year term of…
Continue Reading
Previous191192193194195196197Next

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