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

Consulting Experts — Identity, as Opposed to Opinions, Is Discoverable without Showing of Exceptional Circumstances (Case Law Split)

Manzo v. Stanley Black & Decker Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2861 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 9, 2015): Presently before the Court in this personal injury case is Defendant Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.'s ("Black & Decker" or "Defendant") motion to compel a complete response to an interrogatory seeking identification ...
Manzo v. Stanley Black & Decker Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2861 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 9, 2015): Presently before the Court in this personal injury case is Defendant Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.'s ("Black & Decker" or "Defendant") motion to compel …
Continue Reading

Supreme Court — Rule 606(b) Bars New Trial Based on Juror’s Affidavit of Another Juror’s Statements in Deliberations — No Exception for Juror’s Lying during Voir Dire — Juror’s Experience Unrelated to Case ≠ “Extraneous” Information

Barger v. Shauers, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 8294 (U.S. Dec. 9, 2014): Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) provides that certain juror testimony regarding what occurred in a jury room is inadmissible "[d]uring an inquiry into the validity of a verdict." The question presented in this case is whether Rule 606(b) p ...
Barger v. Shauers, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 8294 (U.S. Dec. 9, 2014): Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) provides that certain juror testimony regarding what occurred in a jury room is inadmissible "[d]uring an inquiry into the validity of a verdict." The …
Continue Reading

Arbitration — All Writs Act Cannot Be Used to Enjoin Arbitration Based on Claim-Preclusive Effect of Prior Federal Judgment That Merely Confirmed Prior Arbitration without Considering Merits — Claim Preclusion Is for Arbitrators to Decide

Citigroup, Inc. v. Abu Dhabi Inv. Auth., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 549 (2d Cir. Jan. 14, 2015): This case presents the question of whether the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), permits a federal district court to enjoin a second arbitration between parties to a contractual arbitration agreement based on what [*2]  one party asserts is ...
Citigroup, Inc. v. Abu Dhabi Inv. Auth., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 549 (2d Cir. Jan. 14, 2015): This case presents the question of whether the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), permits a federal district court to enjoin a…
Continue Reading

Third Party Emails Produced by Party Sufficiently Authenticated by Act of Production when Offered by Opponent But Hearsay / Admissibility Objections Must Separately Be Satisfied

Broadspring, Inc. v. Congoo, LLC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177838 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 2014): Plaintiff's second motion in limine seeks to exclude nine e-mails that were sent to Broadspring or Mindset Interactive employees by third-party software distributors with whom they once conducted business. The motion is GRANTE ...
Broadspring, Inc. v. Congoo, LLC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177838 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 2014): Plaintiff's second motion in limine seeks to exclude nine e-mails that were sent to Broadspring or Mindset Interactive employees by third-party software distributors with whom they …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — No Abuse of Discretion to Deny § 1927 Sanctions, But Rule 26(g) Sanctions Are Mandatory, Discretion Limited to Type — Amount Paid in Settlement May = Admission Claim Sound — Recidivism Is Factor in Choosing Sanction

Rojas v. Town of Cicero, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 72 (7th Cir. Jan. 5, 2015): Merced Rojas contended in this suit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 that the Town of Cicero violated the First Amendment by firing him because he supported a political opponent of Larry Dominick, the Town's president. After an eight-day trial, a jury found in Rojas&# ...
Rojas v. Town of Cicero, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 72 (7th Cir. Jan. 5, 2015): Merced Rojas contended in this suit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 that the Town of Cicero violated the First Amendment by firing him because he supported…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Second Circuit Reaffirms Negligence Standard for Adverse Inference Instruction — Physical Evidence (Same Post 37(e)?) — Same Standard in Criminal as Civil Case — Government Department’s Policy No Excuse for Spoliation

United States v. Garcia, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 392 (2d Cir. Jan. 7, 2015): ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of said District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED and that the defendant-appellant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is
United States v. Garcia, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 392 (2d Cir. Jan. 7, 2015): ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of said District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED and that the…
Continue Reading

Discovery — Fact That Documents Are Publicly Available Is No Defense to Production of Documents Possessed, But There Is No Duty to Obtain Unpossessed, Publicly Available Documents for Production (What About Work Product?)

Todd v. Tempur-Sealy Int’l, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161037 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2014): I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs' initial Complaint, filed on October 25, 2013, and operative Second Amended Complaint, filed on August 29, 2014, allege misrepresentations and omissions by Defendants Tempur-Sealy Int ...
Todd v. Tempur-Sealy Int’l, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161037 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2014): I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs' initial Complaint, filed on October 25, 2013, and operative Second Amended Complaint, filed on August 29, 2014, allege misrepresentations and omissions by …
Continue Reading

Rule 11 and Removal — No Abuse of Discretion to Deny Sanctions for Clear Rule 11 Violation — Rooker-Feldman Inapplicable to Removed Claims — § 1447(c) Sanctions Shouldn’t Be Imposed to Discourage All But Air-Tight Cases for Removal

Lundahl v. Home Depot, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22993 (10th Cir. Dec. 3, 2014): Plaintiff Holli Lundahl, proceeding pro se,1 appeals from the district court's order denying her motion for sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 against defendants Home Depot, Inc., and Citibank N.A based on her assertion they wrongfully rem ...
Lundahl v. Home Depot, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22993 (10th Cir. Dec. 3, 2014): Plaintiff Holli Lundahl, proceeding pro se,1 appeals from the district court's order denying her motion for sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 against defendants…
Continue Reading

RICO — The Act of Filing Even a Frivolous Lawsuit Does Not, by Itself, Constitute an Act of Extortion within the Hobbs Act — Noerr Pennington Applied to Litigation: Two-Part Test

Content Extraction & Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24258 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 23, 2014): We turn next to Diebold's appeal from the district court's dismissal of its tortious interference and RICO violation claims against CET. Diebold's claims all arise from the following pred ...
Content Extraction & Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24258 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 23, 2014): We turn next to Diebold's appeal from the district court's dismissal of its tortious interference and RICO violation claims against …
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Court May Dismiss for Deliberate Violation of Rule 37 without Considering Lesser Sanctions (Unlike Inherent Power) — Not Every Willful Violation of Court Order Justifies Dismissal — 8th Circuit’s 3-Part Test — What Is Prejudice

Comstock v. UPS Ground Freight, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24554 (8th Cir. Dec. 30, 2014): Responding to serious misconduct during discovery, the district court1 sanctioned Dolores Comstock by dismissing her lawsuit. Comstock appeals this dismissal, and we affirm. 1   The Honorable Susan ...
Comstock v. UPS Ground Freight, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24554 (8th Cir. Dec. 30, 2014): Responding to serious misconduct during discovery, the district court1 sanctioned Dolores Comstock by dismissing her lawsuit. Comstock appeals this dismissal, and we affirm. 1  …
Continue Reading
Previous215216217218219220221Next

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