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

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

Experts — Reliance on Business Plan without Inquiry into Qualifications of Preparers or Underlying Assumptions Renders Opinion Unreliable — Expert’s Alternate Opinion Should’ve Been Allowed: Exclusion of Critical Evidence Is Extreme Sanction

ZF Meritor, LLC v. Eaton Corp., 696 F.3d 254 (3d Cir. 2012): 2. Expert Testimony on Damages In their cross-appeal, Plaintiffs argue that the District Court erred in excluding DeRamus's testimony on the issue of damages. The core of DeRamus's damages analysis was one page (titled " ...
ZF Meritor, LLC v. Eaton Corp., 696 F.3d 254 (3d Cir. 2012): 2. Expert Testimony on Damages In their cross-appeal, Plaintiffs argue that the District Court erred in excluding DeRamus's testimony on the issue of damages. The core of DeRamus's …
Continue Reading

Internet Evidence — Circumstantial Authentication That Defendants Made Yelp Postings: Failure to Deny Authorship and Repetition of Substantially the Same Alleged Grievances in Court Filings Suffices

Pham v. Lee, 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8812 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 11, 2014): Plaintiff Randal Pham, an ophthalmologist, filed a defamation action against defendants Jenny Lee and Alvin Lee (the Lees) for statements they made on the Internet accusing Dr. Pham of fraud, among other things. The Lees moved to strike Dr. P ...
Pham v. Lee, 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8812 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 11, 2014): Plaintiff Randal Pham, an ophthalmologist, filed a defamation action against defendants Jenny Lee and Alvin Lee (the Lees) for statements they made on the Internet …
Continue Reading

§ 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
Previous220221222223224225226Next

Recent Posts

(1) RICO Pattern: Open-Ended Continuity — The Vendetta Exception — Jury Could Reasonably Infer That Scheme Directed at One Person, With Goal of Destroying His Current and Future Business Prospects, Presented A Threat of Continued Racketeering Activity Extending Indefinitely into the Future — Lawsuit’s “Fortuitous Interruption” of Scheme ≠ Lack of Threat of Continuing Racketeering Activity — Acts of Concealment Used to Perpetuate Violations — Multiple Schemes Not Required — Jury Could Judge Defendant’s Credibility in Assessing Threat of Continuing Criminal Activity — (2) RICO Conspiracy — Two Methods of Proof: Agreement to Overall Objective Or to Commit Predicate Acts — Agreement Can Be Inferred from Conduct — Conspirator Needn’t Know All Details, Have Contact with Other Conspirators Or Participate in Every Stage

Experts: “Normally, Courts Are Loath to Outright Dismiss An Expert” (Good Quote) — Experts Are Unhelpful If They Misstate the Law [Note Premise That Testimony on Law Not Precluded Outright] — Rule 37 Sanctions Unwarranted for Unjustifiable Failure to Produce Relevant Document Already in Requester’s Possession

FRAP 38 Sanctions: (1) Pressing Objectively Frivolous Arguments, Multiple Misstatements at Oral Argument and Failure to Address What District Judge Said Warrant Award against Appellants’ Counsel (Only) — (2) “General Award” of $5,000 Warranted Where Appellee Failed to Sufficiently Document Its Fees and Expenses [Goodyear v. Haegar Issue]]

RICO: Capital Call Investment Process Increasing Equity of Those Responding to Call at Expense of Those Not Responding ≠ Collection of An Unlawful Debt

RICO [And Constitutional] Standing: Concrete Injury Requirement Not Satisfied by Alleged Intangible Injuries of Intrusion Upon Seclusion, Confusion And Emotional Distress, Public Disclosure of Private Facts, Deterred Speech On Nondefamatory Matters, Violation Of First Amendment Rights, And Compulsion

Rule 37(b) Sanctions: Striking of Answer, Default Judgment, Civil Contempt and Piercing Corporate Veil for Deliberate Disregard of Multiple Orders to Produce — Finding of Deliberate Disregard of Court Order Is Factual, Triggering Clear Error Review — Discretion Narrows When Default Sanction Involved — Fourth Circuit Factors for Rule 37 Default Sanction Are Different Than Those for Inherent Power Dismissal Sanction — Continued Defiance of Court Orders And Millions in Unpaid Judgments And Tax Liens Render Lesser Sanctions Futile

RICO: No Causation for Company Harmed by Governmental Customers Shunning It After Employee Publishes Book Admitting He Bribed Governmental Officials — Harm Too Indirect, Not from Bribery (Predicate Act) But from Customers’ Decisions to Shun and Publication of Book (Both Lawful) — Customers Injured by Bribery of Their Officials Are More Direct Plaintiffs

FRAP 38 Sanctions for Frivolous Opposition to Arbitration

Extrinsic Fraud Exception to Rooker-Feldman — Where Defendants’ Perjury, False Evidence, Flawed Legal Arguments Prevented Plaintiffs from Presenting Their Claim in State Court

Federal Jurisdiction: Party Can Waive Subject Matter Jurisdiction — While Federal Courts Must Ensure They Do Not Lack Subject Matter Jurisdiction, There Is No Duty to Find and Exercise It

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