Complex Lit Blog

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Court May Take Notice of Fact News Articles Published But Not Substance — Same for Government Records in California

Inewsource v. Superior Court, 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 3629 (Cal. Ct. App. May 26, 2015): Petitioner inewsource seeks disclosure of documents from real party in interest North County Transit District (the District) under the California Public Records Act (PRA). (Gov. Code, 6250 et seq.)[1] The documents at issue reflect th ...

Are Attorney’s Fees and Not Just Costs Awardable under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(d) for a Prior Action That Was Voluntarily Dismissed and Based on Or Including the Same Claim Against the Same Defendant? — Circuit Split

Raniolo v. Southport, LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116047 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 1, 2015): This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Petition and Request for Attorneys' Fees and Costs [ECF No. 24] and Defendants' Memo of Costs [ECF No. 29]. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This lawsuit ...

RICO — Cover-Up Conspiracy Insufficiently Related to Original Conspiracy to Be Part of Same Pattern, Cannot Establish Open-Ended Continuity — Attorney Fees in Bringing RICO Claim ≠ RICO Injury — Factually Pleading Conspiracy (8(a), Not 9(b))

The Knit With v. Knitting Fever, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15575 (3d Cir. Sept. 2, 2015): The Knit With ("TKW") appeals several orders the district court entered in TKW's suit alleging various claims under state and federal law. For the reasons that follow, we will affirm the district court. I.

Rule 11 Sanctions — Purpose: Deter Baseless Filings and Streamline Administration of Courts — Court Must Describe Conduct Determined to Constitute Violation and Explain Basis for Sanction Imposed

Mollis v. Corso, 2015 R.I. Super. LEXIS 42 (R.I. Super. Ct. Jan. 22, 2015) (see also our post of Dec. 21, 2014, regarding an earlier decision in this proceeding): This matter comes before the Court to set the appropriate amount of sanctions to be imposed upon Attorney Mark Welch (Attorney Welch) who, in representing former Secretary o ...

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Use of Google Maps to Calculate Distances and Ascertain Geographic Locations

Ward v. Stewart, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130686 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2015): Plaintiffs Kevin A. Ward, Sr. and Pamela Ward (collectively "plaintiffs") initially filed this action in Supreme Court, Lewis County, against defendant Anthony Wayne Stewart ("Stewart" or "defendant"), asserting four causes of actio ...

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 …

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. ***

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 ...

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 …

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 ...

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Court May Take Notice of Fact News Articles Published But Not Substance — Same for Government Records in California

Are Attorney’s Fees and Not Just Costs Awardable under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(d) for a Prior Action That Was Voluntarily Dismissed and Based on Or Including the Same Claim Against the Same Defendant? — Circuit Split

RICO — Cover-Up Conspiracy Insufficiently Related to Original Conspiracy to Be Part of Same Pattern, Cannot Establish Open-Ended Continuity — Attorney Fees in Bringing RICO Claim ≠ RICO Injury — Factually Pleading Conspiracy (8(a), Not 9(b))

Rule 11 Sanctions — Purpose: Deter Baseless Filings and Streamline Administration of Courts — Court Must Describe Conduct Determined to Constitute Violation and Explain Basis for Sanction Imposed

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Use of Google Maps to Calculate Distances and Ascertain Geographic Locations

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

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

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

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)

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

Recent Posts

RICO: Cover-Up Within Limitations Period of Untimely RICO Violation “Was Merely A Continuation” Of The Original Injury And Could Not Be Used “As A ‘Bootstrap’ To Salvage [The] Time-Barred Claims–Declining to Apply Pinkerton Doctrine to Civil RICO Claims

Inherent Power — Circumstantial Evidence — Fact That Bad Faith May Be Shown by Establishing That Conduct Was So Egregious It Was Necessarily Committed in Bad Faith Does Not Mean That Bad Faith Must Be The Sole Explanation for The Bad Conduct

RICO Causation: Testing Labs’ Misstatements As to Alcohol Tests’ Efficacy Not Communicated to Plaintiffs’ Employers Did Not Cause Plaintiffs’ Professional Harm

Rule 37(d) Sanctions — For Failure to Serve Answers, Objections, Or Written Response to Discovery Requests — Are Not Limited to Intentional Misconduct; Even Innocent Mistakes May Be Covered

Sanctions: (1) Rule 11 Does Not Apply to Litigation Papers Initially Filed in State Court — Only Reaffirmance in Federal Court Post-Removal Is Subject to Sanction — (2) “The Fact That A Legal Theory Is A Long-Shot Does Not Necessarily Mean It Is Sanctionable” (Good Quote)

Supreme Court: Relief under Rule 60(b)(6) Requires Extraordinary Circumstances Even If It Is Invoked to Allow Amendment of The Complaint–Rule 15’s Liberal Approach to Amendment Does Not Change That (Reversing Second Circuit)

FRAP 38 Sanctions — Eleventh Circuit Generally Does Not Impose FRAP 38 Sanctions on Pro Se Litigants, But May Do So If They Have Persisted Despite Judicial Warnings of Frivolousness

Inherent Power Sanctions: No Dismissal with Prejudice If Lesser Sanctions Will Suffice — The Liberal Pleading Standard of Swierkiewicz “Is Still Good Law”

Archives

New York Office