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 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

§ 1927 Sanctions May Only Be Imposed on Attorneys, Not Law Firms — Circuit Split

Kaass Law v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15127 (9th Cir. Aug. 27, 2015): In this appeal, Appellant Kaass Law challenges the district court's decision to grant Appellee Wells Fargo's motion for sanctions against it pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927. We hold that 28 U.S.C. § 1927 does not permit the imposit ...
Kaass Law v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15127 (9th Cir. Aug. 27, 2015): In this appeal, Appellant Kaass Law challenges the district court's decision to grant Appellee Wells Fargo's motion for sanctions against it pursuant to…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 — No Bad Faith, No Sanctions for Contradictory Complaints — OK to Decide “That Devoting Further Resources to Investigating the Alleged [Rule 11 Violation] Was Not Worth the Candle Since the Case Was Already Terminated” (Good Quote)

Hourani v. Mirtchev, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13342 (D.C. Cir. July 31, 2015) (the RICO rulings of this decision are excerpted in a separate post): Rule 11 Sanctions Mirtchev and Krull Corporation cross-appeal the district court's denial of their motion for Rule 11 sanctions. They claim that the plaintiffs reli ...
Hourani v. Mirtchev, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13342 (D.C. Cir. July 31, 2015) (the RICO rulings of this decision are excerpted in a separate post): Rule 11 Sanctions Mirtchev and Krull Corporation cross-appeal the district court's denial of their motion…
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — LEXIS Results, Governmental, Newspaper, Party Websites — Notice Doesn’t Convert 12(b)(6) to Summary Judgment — Improperly Raising New Arguments by Letter after Oral Argument without Permission

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Wrights Mill Holdings, LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115610 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2015):  At issue in this interpleader action is whether Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo"), the Trustee responsible for the assets held in a collateralized debt obligation ("CDO"), is obliged, under the terms ...
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Wrights Mill Holdings, LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115610 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2015):  At issue in this interpleader action is whether Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo"), the Trustee responsible for the assets held in…
Continue Reading

Rule 37 and Inherent Power Sanctions Not Stayed by Bankruptcy Filing — Judge’s Adverse Rulings ≠ Grounds to Recuse

Coope v. Dallas Police Ass’n, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21663 (5th Cir. Nov. 14, 2014): Jay Sandon Cooper moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal of the district court's order compelling him to respond to a postjudgment discovery request by the Dallas Police Association and Glenn White, the order i ...
Coope v. Dallas Police Ass’n, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21663 (5th Cir. Nov. 14, 2014): Jay Sandon Cooper moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal of the district court's order compelling him to respond to …
Continue Reading

Contempt Sanctions (Monetary) Not Stayed by Bankruptcy Filing

United States v. Coulton, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22233 (11th Cir. Nov. 25, 2014): A June 2007 indictment in the Southern District of Florida charged Patrick Coulton with a formidable array of drug and money-laundering offenses. Although not admitted to practice in the Southern District of Florida, Emmanuel Roy (now disbarred and ...
United States v. Coulton, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22233 (11th Cir. Nov. 25, 2014): A June 2007 indictment in the Southern District of Florida charged Patrick Coulton with a formidable array of drug and money-laundering offenses. Although not admitted to …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Federal Courts May Take Judicial Notice of Related State Court Records on State Court Websites

Two Cases: 1. Ceras v. Janda, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175586 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2014) (“The Court takes judicial notice of Internet records relating to this action in the state appellate courts (available at http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov) ("state court records"). See Smith v. Duncan, 297 F.3d ...
Two Cases: 1. Ceras v. Janda, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175586 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2014) (“The Court takes judicial notice of Internet records relating to this action in the state appellate courts (available at http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov) ("state court records"). See…
Continue Reading

Law of the Case Doctrine Is Not Jurisdictional but Discretionary — As Long as Case Is Alive, Court Can Always Revoke Earlier Rulings (Good Quote) — 3 Exceptions to Mandate Rule: New Evidence, New Law, Manifest Injustice

Muecke Co. v. CVS Caremark Corp., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15158 (5th Cir. Aug. 25, 2015): The plaintiffs argue that the law-of-the-case doctrine or, alternatively, the mandate rule prevents the district [*9]  court from reconsidering its previous order denying the defendants' motion to compel arbitration. Th ...
Muecke Co. v. CVS Caremark Corp., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15158 (5th Cir. Aug. 25, 2015): The plaintiffs argue that the law-of-the-case doctrine or, alternatively, the mandate rule prevents the district [*9]  court from reconsidering its previous order denying the…
Continue Reading

Authentication of Internet Evidence — Witness Affidavit Plus Printout Showing URL, Date of Printing or Other Identifying Information — Wayback Machine Printout + Custodian’s Affidavit to Establish Date Material Appeared

SEC v. Berrettini, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115963 (N.D. Ill. Sept 1, 2015): The SEC brings an insider trading action against Defendants Morando Berrettini ("Berrettini") and Ralph Pirtle ("Pirtle"). Before the Court are the SEC's motions in limine numbers 7 through 10 [191-94]. For the reasons s ...
SEC v. Berrettini, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115963 (N.D. Ill. Sept 1, 2015): The SEC brings an insider trading action against Defendants Morando Berrettini ("Berrettini") and Ralph Pirtle ("Pirtle"). Before the Court are the SEC's motions in limine numbers 7 …
Continue Reading

Counsel Not Sanctionable under 37(c)(1) — Limits of Right to Rely on Inhouse Counsel for 26(a)(1) Disclosures — Due Process Failure Cured by Opportunity to Be Heard on Reconsideration, Where Court Didn’t Apply Heightened Standard of Review

Sun River Energy, Inc. v. Nelson, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15645 (10th Cir. Sept. 2, 2015): James E. Pennington and Stephen E. Csajaghy, former counsel for plaintiff Sun River Energy, Inc. (Sun River) in the underlying proceedings, appeal from a judgment of the district court sanctioning them, jointly and severally, in the amount of $20,3 ...
Sun River Energy, Inc. v. Nelson, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15645 (10th Cir. Sept. 2, 2015): James E. Pennington and Stephen E. Csajaghy, former counsel for plaintiff Sun River Energy, Inc. (Sun River) in the underlying proceedings, appeal from a…
Continue Reading
Previous196197198199200201202Next

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