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

§ 1782 Allows Foreign Criminal Complainant to Obtain Documentary Discovery in the United States for Foreign Criminal Investigation Involved an Investigating Magistrate

In re Application for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to Conduct Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 23492 (2d Cir. Dec. 12, 2014): The question presented is one of first impression2 in this Court--whether 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which ...
In re Application for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to Conduct Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 23492 (2d Cir. Dec. 12, 2014): The question presented is one of first impression2…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court — Removal — § 1446(a) Requires Only Plausible Allegation of Amount in Controversy — Evidence Required Only If Plaintiff Contests, or Court Questions, Defendant’s Allegation — No Presumption against Removal in CAFA Cases

Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company, LLC v. Owens, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 8435 (U.S. Dec. 15, 2014): To remove a case from a state court to a federal court, a defendant must file in the federal forum a notice of removal "containing a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal." 28 U. S. C. §1446(a). When remov ...
Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company, LLC v. Owens, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 8435 (U.S. Dec. 15, 2014): To remove a case from a state court to a federal court, a defendant must file in the federal forum a notice of removal…
Continue Reading

Sanctions Wrongly Based in Part on Speculation (X May Have Submitted False Filings) — Defendant Not Tarred with Co-Defendant’s Misconduct — Ninth Circuit Default Standards — Discretion Narrows as Severity of Sanction Increases (Good Quote)

Loops, LLC v. Phoenix Trading, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21602 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 13, 2014): The issue before us on appeal is whether the district court abused its discretion in granting sanctions of default judgment, attorney's fees, and costs to plaintiffs. The attorney's fees and costs were imposed jointly on defendan ...
Loops, LLC v. Phoenix Trading, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21602 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 13, 2014): The issue before us on appeal is whether the district court abused its discretion in granting sanctions of default judgment, attorney's fees, and costs …
Continue Reading

Email Admissibility — Admissions, State of Mind, Excited Utterance, Intent or Plan — Courts Sometimes More Lenient with Affidavits and Documents of Party Opposing Summary Judgment

Fleming v. Purcell Painting & Coatings Sw., Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178471 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 30, 2014): Defendant Purcell Painting and Coatings Southwest moves for summary judgment. (Def.'s Corrected Mot. Summ. J., ECF No. 29.) Plaintiff Jay Fleming opposes the motion. (Pl.'s Opp'n to Def.'s Mot., ECF No. 39.) ***
Fleming v. Purcell Painting & Coatings Sw., Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178471 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 30, 2014): Defendant Purcell Painting and Coatings Southwest moves for summary judgment. (Def.'s Corrected Mot. Summ. J., ECF No. 29.) Plaintiff Jay Fleming opposes…
Continue Reading

Three Good Quotes When You Have to Change Position or Ask a Judge to

“Justice Frankfurter once remarked that, ‘Wisdom too often never comes, and so one ought not to reject it merely because it comes late.’  Henslee v. Union Planters Nat’l Bank & Trust Co., 355 U.S. 595, 600 (Frankfurter, J., dissenting).  This is one of those moments.”  Marsden v. Select Medical Corp., 2007 U.S. D ...
“Justice Frankfurter once remarked that, ‘Wisdom too often never comes, and so one ought not to reject it merely because it comes late.’  Henslee v. Union Planters Nat’l Bank & Trust Co., 355 U.S. 595, 600 (Frankfurter, J.,…
Continue Reading

Circumstantial Email Authentication — Testimony from One User of a Shared Account That Emails Bore the Typical Signature of One Defendant (Sender) and Contents Reflected Matters Known to Her Husband (On Whose Behalf The Messages Were Sent)

Commonwealth v. Johnson, 470 Mass. 300, 2014 Mass. LEXIS 955 (Mass. Dec. 23, 2014): This case concerns the constitutionality of the criminal harassment statute, G. L. c. 265, § 43A (a), and its application to acts of cyberharassment among others. Specifically, we consider whether a pattern of harassing conduct that includes ...
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 470 Mass. 300, 2014 Mass. LEXIS 955 (Mass. Dec. 23, 2014): This case concerns the constitutionality of the criminal harassment statute, G. L. c. 265, § 43A (a), and its application to acts of cyberharassment among others.…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanction: Stripping Pro Hac Vice Status (PHV) for Slipping Note to Witness — PHV as Property Right — Tossing Note = Spoliation — That Lawyer Was Corner-Cutting Before Relevant to Sanction (Good Quote)

Ryan v. Astra Tech, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21628 (1st Cir. Nov. 14, 2014) (Kayatta, J.): Attorney Jeffrey Ryan ("Ryan") appeals from the district court's revocation of his permission to practice pro hac vice for the plaintiff in the underlying lawsuit that gave rise to these proceedings.1 ...
Ryan v. Astra Tech, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21628 (1st Cir. Nov. 14, 2014) (Kayatta, J.): Attorney Jeffrey Ryan ("Ryan") appeals from the district court's revocation of his permission to practice pro hac vice for the plaintiff in the …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Obituary Posted on Funeral Home Website Properly Noticed, Like Obituary Appearing in Newspaper

Shaut v. Sec’y of Dep’t of HHS, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176591 (N.D.N.Y. Dec. 22, 2014): On July 23, 2014, pro se Plaintiff Anna M. Shaut filed a complaint against the United States Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") seeking judicial review, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1395ff(b), of a May 22, 2014, decision of the Medicar ...
Shaut v. Sec’y of Dep’t of HHS, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176591 (N.D.N.Y. Dec. 22, 2014): On July 23, 2014, pro se Plaintiff Anna M. Shaut filed a complaint against the United States Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS")…
Continue Reading

Supreme Court: Application of Res Judicata to Nonparties — Six Situations — Federal vs. State Law on the Preclusive Effect of Federal-Court Judgments (Federal Question vs. Diversity Cases)

Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880 (2008): The preclusive effect of a federal-court judgment is determined by federal common law.  See Semtek Int'l Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 531 U.S. 497, 507-508, 121 S. Ct. 1021, 149 L. Ed. 2d 32 (2001).  For judgments in federal-question cases--for example, Herrick ...
Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880 (2008): The preclusive effect of a federal-court judgment is determined by federal common law.  See Semtek Int'l Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 531 U.S. 497, 507-508, 121 S. Ct. 1021, 149 L. Ed. 2d…
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege — Three Approaches to Waiver of Privilege and Work Product Protection — Evidence of Reliance on Advice of Counsel in Settling Case = Waiver in Insurer’s Trial against Adjuster and His Firm

Seneca Ins. Co. v. Western Claims, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24172 (10th Cir. Dec. 22, 2014): Seneca Insurance Company paid $1 million to settle a lawsuit in which its insured alleged Seneca had mishandled insurance claims for hail damage to the insured's property. Seeking to recoup the costs of defending and settling the ...
Seneca Ins. Co. v. Western Claims, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24172 (10th Cir. Dec. 22, 2014): Seneca Insurance Company paid $1 million to settle a lawsuit in which its insured alleged Seneca had mishandled insurance claims for hail damage…
Continue Reading
Previous217218219220221222223Next

Recent Posts

Rule 41(b): Five Factors to Be Weighed in Deciding Whether Dismissal Is Appropriate (Second Circuit) — Is A Finding of Bad Faith or Fault Required if Dismissal Is Without Prejudice? — Undecided If Truly Without Prejudice But It Is Required If the Without Prejudice Dismissal Will Act as a Dismissal on the Merits (Here, Because of the Statute of Limitations) — Failure To Consider A Lesser Sanction Than Dismissal Is Generally An Abuse Of Discretion

Spoliation Sanctions/Mootness: Stipulation Resolving “All Pending Discovery Disputes,” Which Are Enumerated, Does Not Moot Subsequent Sanctions Motion for ESI Spoliation — Postjudgment Sanctions Order Is Appealable When District Court Has Finally Disposed of Both Liability and Amount

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Default Judgment Appropriate Only As a Last Resort, When Less Drastic Sanctions Would Not Ensure Compliance with the Court’s Orders — (2) Default Judgment Sanction Requires Willful or Bad Faith Failure to Obey Discovery Order — (3) Fugitive Defendant’s Failure to Appear at Court-Ordered, Remote Deposition Despite Court Warning That Sanctions Could Follow Disobedience Warrants Default Judgment — (4) District Court Afforded Wide Discretion in Interpreting Its Own Orders — (5) Filing a Notice of Appeal from a Non-Appealable Order (Here, a Discovery Order) Does Not Deprive the District Court of Jurisdiction over the Case

RICO and Injunctions: (1) State Court Actions Designed to Perpetuate and Monetize a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable under RICO, Even Though They Are Not Themselves Alleged to Be Predicate Acts [Note: Noerr Pennington Applies in RICO Actions] — (2) Although Civil RICO’s Text and Legislative History Fail to Reveal Any Intent to Override the Provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act, Arbitrations Are Enjoinable Under the “Effective Vindication” Doctrine Where They Operate As a Prospective Waiver of a Party’s Right to Pursue Statutory RICO Remedies — (3) Arbitration Findings May Be Given Collateral Estoppel Effect in a Civil RICO Action — (4) Injunction of Non-Corrupt State Court Litigations That Furthers a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable Under the Anti-Injunction Act’s “Expressly Authorized” Exception — (5) “The Irreparable Harm Requirement Is The Single Most Important Prerequisite For The Issuance Of A Preliminary Injunction” (Good Quote) — (6) When Injunction Is Based on “Serious Questions on the Merits” Rather Than “Likelihood of Success,” Court May Rely on Unverified Pleadings and Attached Exhibits to Assess the Merits, Unless the Opponent Has Raised Substantial Questions (Here, the Opponent Failed to Request an Evidentiary Hearing) — (7) Whether Amended Pleading Moots An Appeal Turns on Whether It Materially Changes the Substantive Basis for the Appeal — (8) Meaning of “In That” (“Used To Introduce A Statement That Explains Or Gives More Specific Information” About A Prior Statement)

RICO: Fraudulent Concealment Must Prevent Discovery of the Injury to Toll Statute of Limitations

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Abuse of Discretion Review = Legal Conclusions De Novo. Factual Findings for Clear Error — (2) Client May Be Sanctioned for Misconduct of Its Counsel, Though Here Client Was Directly Involved in Bad Faith Misbehavior — (3) Is There A Difference, Under Rule 11 As Opposed to Rule 37, Concerning Whether A Client Can Be Sanctioned for Its Counsel’s Misconduct? — (4) While Sanctions of Last Resort (Dismissal/Default) Are Apt Only If Lesser Sanctions Wouldn’t Ensure Compliance, Rule 37 Doesn’t Require the Vain Gesture of First Imposing Lessert Sanctions When It Is Clear They Would be Ineffective — (5) Court’s Reconsideration of Non-Final Orders Is Governed by Rule 54(b), And Court’s Discretion under That Rule Is Governed by the Law-of-the-Case-Doctrine

RICO: (1) Special Pleading Requirements? — (2) Although Enterprise Must Be More Than a Summation of the Predicate Acts, The Predicate Acts Can Demonstrate the Existence of the Enterprise — (3) Requirement That Association-in-Fact Exist For Purposes Other Than Just to Commit Predicate Acts Merely Requires Continuity — (4) To State an Association-in-Fact Enterprise Consisting of One Natural Person and Collection of Legal Fictions Requires Factual Detail As to How They Acted Together — (5) “A § 1962(c) Enterprise Must Be More Than An Association of Individuals Or Entities Conducting the Normal Affairs of a Defendant Corporation” (Good Quote)

RICO: (1) Fee Award May Exceed Amount Recovered — Strict Proportionality Not Required — (2) Nonmonetary Benefits and Injunctive Relief Recovered Also Relevant Factors — (3) Loss on Some Claims Need Not Result in Lowered Fees, Especially When Both Arise Out of The Same Nucleus of Operative Facts

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

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