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

FRAP 38: Permissible for Appeals Court to Affirm Sanctions But Deny FRAP 38 Sanctions for Appeal — A Defendant’s Voluntary Cessation of Complained of Behavior Does Not Moot a Case Unless It Is Clear That The Behavior Could Not Reasonably Be Expected to Recur

Aim Immunotech, Inc. v. Tudor, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 7566 (11th Cir. April 1, 2025) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Plaintiff-Appellant AIM Immunotech, Inc. (AIM) appeals the dismissal of its Amended Complaint against Defendants-Appellees Franz
Aim Immunotech, Inc. v. Tudor, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 7566 (11th Cir. April 1, 2025) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Plaintiff-Appellant AIM Immunotech, Inc. (AIM) appeals the dismissal of its Amended Complaint against Defendants-Appellees Franz [*2]  Tudor, Todd Deutsch, Ted Kellner, Jonathan…
Continue Reading

Rule 11: Violation of 21 Day Safe Harbor “Overlook[ed]” As Non-Prejudicial by First Circuit — “Rule 11 Monetary Sanctions Must Be Reasonable” (Good Quote) — Rule 11(c)(4) Requires Consideration of Offender’s Ability to Pay

Saninocencio v. Pierce & Mandell, P.C., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 8100 (1st Cir. Mar. 31, 2025) (unpublished): JUDGMENT Gary Dolan ("Dolan"), an attorney, appeals from the district court's entry of a January 14, 2022 ...
Saninocencio v. Pierce & Mandell, P.C., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 8100 (1st Cir. Mar. 31, 2025) (unpublished): JUDGMENT Gary Dolan (“Dolan”), an attorney, appeals from the district court’s entry of a January 14, 2022 order on sanctions that, inter alia…
Continue Reading

Temporary Restraining Order = Preliminary Injunction: 3 Supreme Court Cases (TRO=PI x 3)

(1) Dep't of Educ. v. California, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 1370, at *1-2 (April 4, 2025): Although the Courts of Appeals generally lack appellate jurisdiction over appeals from TROs, several factors counsel in favor of construing the District Court ...
(1) Dep’t of Educ. v. California, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 1370, at *1-2 (April 4, 2025): Although the Courts of Appeals generally lack appellate jurisdiction over appeals from TROs, several factors counsel in favor of construing the District Court’s order …
Continue Reading

Rule 37(c)(1) Sanctions — Exclusion of Untimely Expert Report — Eighth Circuit’s 4-Factor Test

E&I Global Energy Servs., Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 7976, 2025 WL 1007290 (8th Cir. April 4, 2025): *1 E&I Global Energy Services, Inc. and E&C Global, LCC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) sued Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Liberty), alleging several breach-of-contract and tort claims arising from Liberty’s promise to ...
E&I Global Energy Servs., Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 7976, 2025 WL 1007290 (8th Cir. April 4, 2025): *1 E&I Global Energy Services, Inc. and E&C Global, LCC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) sued Liberty Mutual Insurance Company…
Continue Reading

RICO: So Insubstantial A Claim As to Fail to Confer Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Puckett v. Ain-Jeem, Inc., 2025 WL 948092 (6th Cir. Feb. 11, 2025): ORDER *1 Carl Ellen Puckett, Jr., and his wife, Marcella Puckett, both proceeding pro se, appeal a district court judgment sua sponte dismissing their complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. (No. 24-5282). Axencis, Inc. conditionally cross-appeals the same judgment. (No. ...
Puckett v. Ain-Jeem, Inc., 2025 WL 948092 (6th Cir. Feb. 11, 2025): ORDER *1 Carl Ellen Puckett, Jr., and his wife, Marcella Puckett, both proceeding pro se, appeal a district court judgment sua sponte dismissing their complaint for lack of…
Continue Reading

RICO: Distinctiveness Issues Most Likely to Appear When The Enterprise Is An Entity Capable of Being Sued, Like A Corporation

Kia America, Inc. v. DMO Auto Acquisitions, LLC, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59773, 2025 WL 968786 (D.N.H. Mar. 31, 2025): *1 Plaintiff Kia America, Inc. (“Kia”) brings this action against a collection of current and former car deale ...
Kia America, Inc. v. DMO Auto Acquisitions, LLC, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59773, 2025 WL 968786 (D.N.H. Mar. 31, 2025): *1 Plaintiff Kia America, Inc. (“Kia”) brings this action against a collection of current and former car dealerships and…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court: RICO: (1) Injuries to Business or Property That Derive from a Personal Injury Are Recoverable — (2) “Injury” Is Interchangeable in Meaning with “Harm” And Other Terms Connoting Loss — (3) “The Clayton Act and § 1964(c) Are Not ‘Interchangeable’” (Good Quote)— (4) (4) “You Can’t Replace Something With Nothing” (Good Quote) — (5) The Recoverable Economic Harm Flowing from Personal Injuries, Like All Other Recoverable RICO Harm, Must be Direct — (6)” Harm Resulting from a Single Tort Is Not a Ticket to Federal Court for Treble Damages” (Good Quote)

Med. Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 1369, 2025 WL 978102 (U.S. Apr. 2, 2025): Barrett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Jackson, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed a ...
Med. Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 1369, 2025 WL 978102 (U.S. Apr. 2, 2025): Barrett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Jackson, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed a concurring opinion.…
Continue Reading

FRAP 38 Sanctions: Eleventh Circuit Generally Declines to Impose FRAP 38 Sanctions on Pro Se Appellants Absent a History of Frivolous Litigation or an Explicit Warning

Hartigan v. Hernando Cnty., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6961, *1 (11th Cir. Mar. 26, 2025) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Kim Hartigan, proceeding pro se, filed suit in federal district court against Hernand ...
Hartigan v. Hernando Cnty., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6961, *1 (11th Cir. Mar. 26, 2025) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: Kim Hartigan, proceeding pro se, filed suit in federal district court against Hernando County, Florida; the County Property Appraiser and Tax Collector…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions for Bad Faith in (1) Misrepresenting Patent Ownership in Amended Complaint and (2) Failing to Supplement Discovery Responses to Rectify This after the Discovery Period Had Closed, Both of Which Led to Continued Litigation After One Plaintiff Had Lost Standing — The Duty To Supplement Discovery Responses under Rule 26(e) Continues Even After The Discovery Period Has Closed — Use of Inherent Power to Sanction Violation of Local Rules That Lack Sanctions Provisions (Sanction Reversed on Other Grounds)

Lowe v. Shieldmark, Inc., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6763 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2025): *1 This patent case is before us following remand proceedings in the district court. The parties have raised numerous issues on appeal. We affirm the di ...
Lowe v. Shieldmark, Inc., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6763 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2025): *1 This patent case is before us following remand proceedings in the district court. The parties have raised numerous issues on appeal. We affirm the district…
Continue Reading

Paul Weiss Did The Right Thing

It is easy to be critical of Paul Weiss’s deal with the Trump Administration.  But moral grandstanding aside, the Firm did the right thing.  Clients invest months and years, and large sums of money, in their law firms.  Clients lose all of that when the firm cannot act, or act effectively, for them.  Yes, there is a financial side to the deal.  There is also a self-preservation aspect.  ...
It is easy to be critical of Paul Weiss’s deal with the Trump Administration.  But moral grandstanding aside, the Firm did the right thing.  Clients invest months and years, and large sums of money, in their law firms.  Clients lose…
Continue Reading
Previous12345Next

Recent Posts

Supreme Court: (1) Fraudulent Inducement Theory of Mail Fraud: Statute Violated If Victim Is Tricked into Parting with Money Or Property, Even If Victim Suffers No Pecuniary Loss — (2) “A Fraud Is Complete When The Defendant Has Induced The Deprivation Of Money Or Property Under Materially False Pretenses” — (3) The Old Soil Principle of Statutory Construction Applies Only to the Extent That a Common-Law Term Has Accumulated a Settled Meaning — (4) Rescission for Fraud Does Not Require Economic Loss; Sufficient If Property of A Different Character Or Condition Provided — i.e, If Victim Tricked into A Bargain Materially Different from The One Promised — (5) “At The Right Level Of Specificity, Anything Can Be Described As ‘Unique’ Or ‘Different From’ Something Else” (Good Quote) — (6) “Materiality Look[s] To The Effect On The Likely Or Actual Behavior Of The Recipient Of The Alleged Misrepresentation” (Good Quote)

Statements in Briefs As Judicial Admissions

Supreme Court: TRO As Appealable Order — And District Court Inaction As Tantamount to Refusing An Injunction And Thus Appealable

“Slow-Playing Discovery” in Response to Court Order, Prejudicing Opponent, Violates Rule 37(b)(2)(A)

RICO Pattern: No Closed-Ended Continuity If Racketeering Activity Lasted Less Than One Year (11th Circuit) — Conspiracy Allegations Governed by Rule 8(a), Not 9(b) — Two Paths to Establishing A RICO Conspiracy: Agreement to Objective Or to Commit 2 Predicate Acts — Plaintiff Need Not Show Reliance When The Predicate Acts Are Wire Fraud — In Dicta, 11th Circuit Intimates That Even If The Primary RICO Violation Allegations Fail, The RICO Conspiracy Allegations Might Survive, But Is Probably Talking About A Conspiracy to Commit The Predicate Acts

United States Trinity Energy Servs., L.L.C. v. Se. Directional Drilling, L.L.C., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 10178 (5th Cir. Apr. 28, 2025): FRAP 38 Separate Motion Requirement FRAP 38 Sanctions Properly Denied for Want of Separate Motion — Request in Brief Insufficient — “Manifest Disregard” Is Not A Freestanding Ground for Vacatur of Arbitration Award in Fifth Circuit (Or First, Eighth Or Eleventh)

§ 1927 Sanctions Apt for Failing to Withdraw Claim Until Summary Judgment Hearing, Requiring Opponent and Court to Prepare for An Abandoned Argument — Bad Faith Established by False and Misleading Statements to Court — Raising New Argument for First Time in Reply Brief Does Not Warrant § 1927 Sanctions

RICO: Mail and Wire Fraud: Act of Emailing Transcript of Court Proceedings Containing Allegedly False Statements Made in Court ≠ Wire Fraud — Mailing (Serving on Opposing Party) Declarations Allegedly Containing False Statements ≠ Mail Fraud

Supreme Court: (1) Rule 11 Sanctions Available Where Affirmative Defense “Obviously Applies” and Plaintiff/Plaintiff’s Counsel “Lack A Good Faith Basis to Believe Otherwise” — (2) If Affirmative Defense Pled, Court May Require Plaintiff to File a Reply to the Answer Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a) Setting forth “Specific, Nonconclusory Factual Allegations” Showing That The Affirmative Defense Does Not Apply — (3) The Title of a Statute And The Heading of a Section May Properly Be Used to Interpret the Text

FRAP 38 Sanctions — Sixth Circuit Usually Declines to Impose FRAP 38 Sanctions Unless An Improper Purpose Was Behind the Appeal

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