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

Are the Costs of Demonstrative Exhibits Used with Experts Taxable under 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4) as Exemplification Costs? Case Law Split

Geiss v. Target Corp., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47841 (D.N.J. April 13, 2015): 1. Fees for exemplification under § 1920(4) Defendant seeks fees for the enlargement and mounting of Plaintiff's medical records and charts and diagrams used at trial that were admitted into evidence. It also seeks reimbur ...
Geiss v. Target Corp., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47841 (D.N.J. April 13, 2015): 1. Fees for exemplification under § 1920(4) Defendant seeks fees for the enlargement and mounting of Plaintiff's medical records and charts and diagrams used at trial that…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 — Actual Notice by Email Doesn’t Satisfy Safe Harbor Requirements — Finding of Meritless, Alone, Insufficient Basis for 1927 or Inherent Power Sanctions

Chong v. Chang, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5381 (2d Cir. April 3, 2015): Michael K. Chong appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Forrest 
Chong v. Chang, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5381 (2d Cir. April 3, 2015): Michael K. Chong appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Forrest , J.), granting appellees' motion for …
Continue Reading

Email Authentication — Confirming Circumstances Beyond Sender’s Self-Identification Needed, Suffice to Authenticate Electronic Communications — Voicemails from Sender with Same Contents Plus The From Line of Email Suffice

Commonwealth v. Czubinski, 2015 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 191 (Mass. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2015): Following a jury trial in the District Court, the defendant, Theresa Czubinski, was convicted of one count of criminal harassment. She appeals, claiming error in the judge's reasonable doubt instruction and in the improper admission ...
Commonwealth v. Czubinski, 2015 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 191 (Mass. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2015): Following a jury trial in the District Court, the defendant, Theresa Czubinski, was convicted of one count of criminal harassment. She appeals, claiming error in …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — No Judicial Notice of Website of Governmental Party Stating Fact Inconsistent With All Evidence before the Government Entity and Contrary to Its Own Findings of Fact (Website as Evidence Creator?)

Spokane Cnty. v. E. Wash. Growth Mgmt. Hearings Board, 2015 Wash. App. LEXIS 755 (Wash. Ct. App. April 9, 2015): We address once again the compliance of Spokane County with Washington's intractable Growth Management Act (GMA), chapter 36.70A RCW, this time in the context of a comprehensive plan amendment that rezoned a pa ...
Spokane Cnty. v. E. Wash. Growth Mgmt. Hearings Board, 2015 Wash. App. LEXIS 755 (Wash. Ct. App. April 9, 2015): We address once again the compliance of Spokane County with Washington's intractable Growth Management Act (GMA), chapter 36.70A RCW, this…
Continue Reading

Diversity Jurisdiction — Last Domicile Not Lost until New One Acquired — Domicile Not Lost by Forcible Change in State of Residence — Meaning of Abuse of Discretion (6th Circuit)

Pitt Excavating, LLC v. Pitt, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 3044 (6th Cir. Feb. 25, 2015): This case concerns the question of whether a person's domicile is his new Tennessee apartment or his old Kentucky home. Plaintiff-Appellant Pitt Excavating, LLC (Pitt Excavating), a Tennessee limited-liability company, filed this act ...
Pitt Excavating, LLC v. Pitt, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 3044 (6th Cir. Feb. 25, 2015): This case concerns the question of whether a person's domicile is his new Tennessee apartment or his old Kentucky home. Plaintiff-Appellant Pitt Excavating, LLC…
Continue Reading

Lawyer Representing Fiduciary Does Not Also Represent, Or Owe Fiduciary Duty to, Beneficiaries — Third Party Beneficiary Argument Not Reached — Lawyer for Personal Representative Not Disqualified from Being Adverse to Beneficiaries

Bain v. McIntosh, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 3116 (11th Cir. Mar. 2, 2015): Howard Walther and Dorothy B. Walther (collectively, the Walthers), the beneficiaries of the James Walther Revocable Life Insurance Trust (the Trust), appeal the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of Steven Kane, Esq. and Kane and Koltun, ...
Bain v. McIntosh, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 3116 (11th Cir. Mar. 2, 2015): Howard Walther and Dorothy B. Walther (collectively, the Walthers), the beneficiaries of the James Walther Revocable Life Insurance Trust (the Trust), appeal the district court's order granting…
Continue Reading

Sanctions under Rule 11 and § 1927 Reviewed for Abuse of Discretion But Invocation of Inherent Power Reviewed De Novo, Factual Findings for Clear Error — Ct. App. Can Ignore Rule 11 and 1927 If Inherent Power Sanctions OK — FRAP 38 Standard

Meyers v. Textron Fin’l Corp., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5736 (5th Cir. April 9, 2015): Following a two-day show-cause hearing, the court imposed sanctions, jointly and severally, against the Meyerses and Cole for their conduct in the RMC case and the sanctions action. In a thirty-six page opinion, the court awarded Textron $79,424.21 (l ...
Meyers v. Textron Fin’l Corp., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5736 (5th Cir. April 9, 2015): Following a two-day show-cause hearing, the court imposed sanctions, jointly and severally, against the Meyerses and Cole for their conduct in the RMC case and…
Continue Reading

Federal Jurisdiction — Principal Place of Business of an Inactive Corporation — Circuit Split

Snyder v. Advanced Academics, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44014 (W.D. Okla. April 3, 2015): A. Circuit Split: Principal Place of Business of an Inactive Corporation There is a split among the circuits on the issue of how to determine the PPB of a "dissolved" or "inactive" corporation ...
Snyder v. Advanced Academics, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44014 (W.D. Okla. April 3, 2015): A. Circuit Split: Principal Place of Business of an Inactive Corporation There is a split among the circuits on the issue of how to determine …
Continue Reading

Email Authentication by Distinctive Characteristics: Names of Parties & Other Employees of Involved Entities, Email Addresses, Dates — Summary Charts: 4-Factor Test & Instruction

United States v. Hoffman, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42818 (E.D. La. April 1, 2015): Before the Court are two motions: (1) the United States' motion in limine for pretrial determination of admissibility [*2]  of emails; and (2) the United States' motion to admit summary witness testimony and summary exhibits. For the rea ...
United States v. Hoffman, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42818 (E.D. La. April 1, 2015): Before the Court are two motions: (1) the United States' motion in limine for pretrial determination of admissibility [*2]  of emails; and (2) the United States'…
Continue Reading

Website Authenticated by Affidavits of Persons Who Accessed Pages Plus Contents of Printouts — Instagram Comments Relevant for Use of Allegedly Generic Term Regardless of Truth of Commenter’s Attitude Toward Term

Camowraps, LLC v. Quantum Digital Ventures LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16091 (E.D. La. Feb. 10, 2015): Plaintiff, Camowraps, LLC ("Camowraps"), is "a leader in the business of manufacturing, selling, and distributing adhesive vinyl films and products," "which are often sold in camouflage patterns . . . [and] us ...
Camowraps, LLC v. Quantum Digital Ventures LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16091 (E.D. La. Feb. 10, 2015): Plaintiff, Camowraps, LLC ("Camowraps"), is "a leader in the business of manufacturing, selling, and distributing adhesive vinyl films and products," "which are often…
Continue Reading
Previous206207208209210211212Next

Recent Posts

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.”

For An Appeal to Be Timely, A Motion for Reconsideration in The District Court (A Rule 59(e) Motion) Must Be Filed, And Not Just Served within 30 Days of The Decision, to Toll The 30-Day Period for Filing An Appeal

There Is No Good-Faith Defense For Issuing An Overly Burdensome Subpoena

Purposes of Rule 37 and Section 1927 Sanctions

While Rule 11 Doesn’t Apply to Appellate Proceedings (Unless It Has Been Incorporated in Local Appellate Rules), Rule 11 Caselaw Is Looked to for Guidance in Interpreting Applicable Sanctions Powers on Appeal

Rule 11 Sanctions & Appellate Review: Abuse of Discretion Standard Applies Unless Sanctions Are Based Solely (Not Just in Part) on Legal Issues, in Which Case Review Is De Novo

Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions for Altering Expert’s 26(a)(2)(B) Report — Without the Expert’s Knowledge or Approval — by Converting It from PDF to Word, Changing Headings and Other Formatting, and Omitting a Page of Relevant Text and Appendices, Even Though Expert Testified That The Overall Substance of the Report Was Unchanged — Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions May Be Reversed If Failure to Comply with Discovery Order Was Due to Misunderstanding or Inability to Comply

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