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

Internet Evidence — Terrorist Website Authenticated by Fact Governments Rely on It, Language and Facts in Postings, Exclusive Interviews, Non-Public Details re Leaders, and Official Seals — No Chain of Custody Needed for Accurate Video

Linde v. Arab Bank, 2015 WL 1565479 (E.D.N.Y. April 8, 2015): VII. Evidentiary Rulings A. Authentication Generally
Linde v. Arab Bank, 2015 WL 1565479 (E.D.N.Y. April 8, 2015): VII. Evidentiary Rulings A. Authentication Generally Federal Rule of Evidence 901 “does not erect a particularly high hurdle” for authenticating evidence. United States v. Dhinsa, 243 F.3d 635, 658 …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — No Appellate Jurisdiction Where Appealed Order Didn’t Include Amount and Subsequent Order Not Appealed From — Substantial Degree of Frivolousness Required for FRAP 38 Sanctions on Pro Se Litigant

McCavey v. Gold, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15761 (11th Cir. Sept. 4, 2015): William M. McCavey, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's dismissal of his complaint filed against nine defendants involved in varying degrees with his state divorce action, asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Georgia state law. ***
McCavey v. Gold, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15761 (11th Cir. Sept. 4, 2015): William M. McCavey, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's dismissal of his complaint filed against nine defendants involved in varying degrees with his state divorce action,…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence Taken on 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss without Converting It into a Summary Judgment Motion — Newspaper Website — Article Stating Date Official (a Defendant) Appointed to Office

Jones v. Chapman, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96964 (D. Md. July 24, 2015): This case arises from allegations of police brutality in connection with the untimely death of Tyrone A. West, Sr. ("Mr. West" or the "Decedent") on July 18, 2013.1 Tawanda Jones, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Tyrone A. W ...
Jones v. Chapman, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96964 (D. Md. July 24, 2015): This case arises from allegations of police brutality in connection with the untimely death of Tyrone A. West, Sr. ("Mr. West" or the "Decedent") on July 18,…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Safe Harbor Triggered by Motion, Not Brief, Declarations — Motion Must Give Sufficient Notice of Conduct at Issue — Discovery re Sanctions only in Extraordinary Circumstances; No Trial Required (Good Quotes)

Burbidge Mitchell & Gross v. Peters, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14405 (10th Cir. Aug. 17, 2015): This diversity case involves the tort of wrongful use of civil proceedings. The case was filed by the Utah law firm of Burbidge, Mitchell & Gross (BMG) against former client C&M Properties, LLC (C&M), which had sued BMG for legal malprac ...
Burbidge Mitchell & Gross v. Peters, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14405 (10th Cir. Aug. 17, 2015): This diversity case involves the tort of wrongful use of civil proceedings. The case was filed by the Utah law firm of Burbidge, Mitchell …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Rule 37 Dismissal Requires Willfulness, Bad Faith or Fault — Fees Limited to Cost of Misconduct, Not Responding to Discovery — Extraordinary Circumstances Needed to Withdraw Consent to Proceed before Magistrate Judge

Odige v. Nat’l Mentor Healthcare, LLC, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15831 (9th Cir. Sept. 4, 2015): In these consolidated appeals, Chuks Odigwe appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his employment discrimination action as a discovery sanction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b). We have jurisdiction under ...
Odige v. Nat’l Mentor Healthcare, LLC, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15831 (9th Cir. Sept. 4, 2015): In these consolidated appeals, Chuks Odigwe appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his employment discrimination action as a discovery sanction under…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Spoliation — Bad Faith as Well as Prejudice Required for Adverse Inference Instruction in Eleventh Circuit

Rives v. LaHood, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4838 (11th Cir. Mar. 25, 2015): We review a district court's decision regarding spoliation sanctions for abuse of discretion. Mann, 588 F.3d at 1310. "[A] party moving for [spoliation] sanctions must establish, among other things, that the destroyed evide ...
Rives v. LaHood, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4838 (11th Cir. Mar. 25, 2015): We review a district court's decision regarding spoliation sanctions for abuse of discretion. Mann, 588 F.3d at 1310. "[A] party moving for [spoliation] sanctions must establish, …
Continue Reading

Unethical or Illegal Conduct by Counsel Vitiates Work Product Protection — RICO: Awareness of Essential Nature and Scope of Enterprise, and Intent to Participate in It, Suffice for §1962(c)

United States v. Pellicano, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14961 (9th Cir. Aug. 25, 2015): Six defendants appeal [*7]  their criminal convictions stemming from a widespread criminal enterprise offering illegal private investigation services in Southern California. At the center of this criminal enterprise was Pellicano Investigative Ag ...
United States v. Pellicano, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14961 (9th Cir. Aug. 25, 2015): Six defendants appeal [*7]  their criminal convictions stemming from a widespread criminal enterprise offering illegal private investigation services in Southern California. At the center of this …
Continue Reading

Rule 37(c)(2) Sanctions for Failure to Admit Per Rule 36 (Here, Lack of Legally Cognizable Injury) — Test: Reasonable Belief Responder Might Prevail on Matter Denied

Magnetar Techs. Corp. v. Intamin, Ltd., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16310 (9th Cir. Sept. 14, 2015): III. Rule 37 Sanctions On cross-appeal, Intamin contends that the district court erred in denying its request for attorney's fees and costs under Rule 37. Intamin claims that Magnetar should be san ...
Magnetar Techs. Corp. v. Intamin, Ltd., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16310 (9th Cir. Sept. 14, 2015): III. Rule 37 Sanctions On cross-appeal, Intamin contends that the district court erred in denying its request for attorney's fees and costs under Rule…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — While Duty to Preserve Isn’t Dependent on Preservation Letter, Where One Is Sent and Abided by, No Error to Deny Adverse Inference for Destroying Other Documents Per Customary Retention Policy (11th Cir. — Bad Faith Required)

Hill v Cundiff, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14101 (11th Cir. Aug. 12, 2015): These consolidated appeals involve student-on-student sexual harassment. Jane Doe, an eighth-grade student at Sparkman Middle School, was raped in a bathroom after school officials decided to use her as bait in a sting operation to catch CJC, another eighth-grade st ...
Hill v Cundiff, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14101 (11th Cir. Aug. 12, 2015): These consolidated appeals involve student-on-student sexual harassment. Jane Doe, an eighth-grade student at Sparkman Middle School, was raped in a bathroom after school officials decided to use…
Continue Reading

Mooting Claim by Offer of Judgment That Offers Plaintiff Complete Relief — Procedure under Rule 12(b)(1) Mirrors Summary Judgment Practice under Rule 56 — Plaintiff’s 26(a)(1) Damages Calculation May ≠ Full Post-Discovery Claim

Flores v. ACT Event Servs., Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16773 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 11, 2015): 3. Mooting Claims Through Offers of Judgment a. Examples of Rule 12(b)(1) Motions Following Offers of Judgment Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 provides defendan ...
Flores v. ACT Event Servs., Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16773 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 11, 2015): 3. Mooting Claims Through Offers of Judgment a. Examples of Rule 12(b)(1) Motions Following Offers of Judgment Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 provides …
Continue Reading
Previous194195196197198199200Next

Recent Posts

(1) RICO Pattern: Open-Ended Continuity — The Vendetta Exception — Jury Could Reasonably Infer That Scheme Directed at One Person, With Goal of Destroying His Current and Future Business Prospects, Presented A Threat of Continued Racketeering Activity Extending Indefinitely into the Future — Lawsuit’s “Fortuitous Interruption” of Scheme ≠ Lack of Threat of Continuing Racketeering Activity — Acts of Concealment Used to Perpetuate Violations — Multiple Schemes Not Required — Jury Could Judge Defendant’s Credibility in Assessing Threat of Continuing Criminal Activity — (2) RICO Conspiracy — Two Methods of Proof: Agreement to Overall Objective Or to Commit Predicate Acts — Agreement Can Be Inferred from Conduct — Conspirator Needn’t Know All Details, Have Contact with Other Conspirators Or Participate in Every Stage

Experts: “Normally, Courts Are Loath to Outright Dismiss An Expert” (Good Quote) — Experts Are Unhelpful If They Misstate the Law [Note Premise That Testimony on Law Not Precluded Outright] — Rule 37 Sanctions Unwarranted for Unjustifiable Failure to Produce Relevant Document Already in Requester’s Possession

FRAP 38 Sanctions: (1) Pressing Objectively Frivolous Arguments, Multiple Misstatements at Oral Argument and Failure to Address What District Judge Said Warrant Award against Appellants’ Counsel (Only) — (2) “General Award” of $5,000 Warranted Where Appellee Failed to Sufficiently Document Its Fees and Expenses [Goodyear v. Haegar Issue]]

RICO: Capital Call Investment Process Increasing Equity of Those Responding to Call at Expense of Those Not Responding ≠ Collection of An Unlawful Debt

RICO [And Constitutional] Standing: Concrete Injury Requirement Not Satisfied by Alleged Intangible Injuries of Intrusion Upon Seclusion, Confusion And Emotional Distress, Public Disclosure of Private Facts, Deterred Speech On Nondefamatory Matters, Violation Of First Amendment Rights, And Compulsion

Rule 37(b) Sanctions: Striking of Answer, Default Judgment, Civil Contempt and Piercing Corporate Veil for Deliberate Disregard of Multiple Orders to Produce — Finding of Deliberate Disregard of Court Order Is Factual, Triggering Clear Error Review — Discretion Narrows When Default Sanction Involved — Fourth Circuit Factors for Rule 37 Default Sanction Are Different Than Those for Inherent Power Dismissal Sanction — Continued Defiance of Court Orders And Millions in Unpaid Judgments And Tax Liens Render Lesser Sanctions Futile

RICO: No Causation for Company Harmed by Governmental Customers Shunning It After Employee Publishes Book Admitting He Bribed Governmental Officials — Harm Too Indirect, Not from Bribery (Predicate Act) But from Customers’ Decisions to Shun and Publication of Book (Both Lawful) — Customers Injured by Bribery of Their Officials Are More Direct Plaintiffs

FRAP 38 Sanctions for Frivolous Opposition to Arbitration

Extrinsic Fraud Exception to Rooker-Feldman — Where Defendants’ Perjury, False Evidence, Flawed Legal Arguments Prevented Plaintiffs from Presenting Their Claim in State Court

Federal Jurisdiction: Party Can Waive Subject Matter Jurisdiction — While Federal Courts Must Ensure They Do Not Lack Subject Matter Jurisdiction, There Is No Duty to Find and Exercise It

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

© 2025 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice