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

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — Court Records from Westlaw — Westlaw as a Reliable Source

Pickens v. Klee, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163390 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 21, 2014): A habeas petitioner has the burden of proving that he or she has exhausted his or her state court remedies. See Rust v. Zent, 17 F.3d 155, 160 (6th Cir. 1994). Federal habeas corpus relief is unavailable to a state prisoner who fails to allege that he or ...
Pickens v. Klee, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163390 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 21, 2014): A habeas petitioner has the burden of proving that he or she has exhausted his or her state court remedies. See Rust v. Zent, 17 F.3d 155,…
Continue Reading

Interlocutory Appeals — Rule 54(b): Separateness Requirement — Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine Does Not Apply to Civil Litigant Refusing to Participate in Lawsuit: Judicial Wariness of Doctrine’s Civil Application — Bond on Appeal Is Optional

Niemi v. Lasshofer, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21365 (10th Cir. Nov. 4, 2014): John Niemi, Robert Naegele, III, and Jesper Parnevik ("Plaintiffs" or "Appellees") claim that Erwin Lasshofer and three companies affiliated with him (the "Lasshofer Defendants" or "Appellants"), along with other co-conspir ...
Niemi v. Lasshofer, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21365 (10th Cir. Nov. 4, 2014): John Niemi, Robert Naegele, III, and Jesper Parnevik ("Plaintiffs" or "Appellees") claim that Erwin Lasshofer and three companies affiliated with him (the "Lasshofer Defendants" or "Appellants"), along…
Continue Reading

Does Twiqbal’s Plausibility Standard Apply to Affirmative Defenses? Case Law Split — Policy Arguments against Application (Including Reliance on Still-Extent Official Form)

Jam Tire, Inc. v. Harbin, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124581 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 5, 2013): Since the Supreme Court's decision in Iqbal v. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), more than 230 federal decisions have addressed whether the plausibility standard applies to affirmative defenses pled in an answer. William M. Jan ...
Jam Tire, Inc. v. Harbin, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124581 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 5, 2013): Since the Supreme Court's decision in Iqbal v. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), more than 230 federal decisions have addressed whether the plausibility standard applies …
Continue Reading

Class Actions — Circuit Split as to Whether Offer of Complete Relief to Named Plaintiff before Certification Motion Filed Moots Case — Split as to Whether Plaintiff May Immediately File Unsupported Certification Motion to Avoid Issue

Minniti v. Eilers, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142439 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 23, 2014): THIS CAUSE has come before the court upon the Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification [ECF No.4]. Plaintiff, Lauren Minniti, filed a Class Action Complaint [ECF No. 1] against John Hancock Financial Network, Inc., John Hancock Life & He ...
Minniti v. Eilers, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142439 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 23, 2014): THIS CAUSE has come before the court upon the Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification [ECF No.4]. Plaintiff, Lauren Minniti, filed a Class Action Complaint [ECF No. 1]…
Continue Reading

Email/Text — Difficulties in Satisfying the Present Sense Impression, Excited Utterance, State of Mind and Business Records Exceptions — In Limine Motion to Exclude Granted Only If Evidence Is Clearly Inadmissible on All Potential Grounds: Good Quote

Galloway v. Chesapeake Union Exempted Village Sch. Bd. of Educ., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151678 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 27, 2014): This civil action is before the court on Defendants' omnibus motion in limine to exclude evidence.... I.  ANALYSIS Because a ruling on a motion < ...
Galloway v. Chesapeake Union Exempted Village Sch. Bd. of Educ., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151678 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 27, 2014): This civil action is before the court on Defendants' omnibus motion in limine to exclude evidence…. I.  ANALYSIS Because a …
Continue Reading

Experts — New Opinion Based on Info Known at Time of Original Report Not Supplemental Report — If Facts Unchanged, 2d Report = Impermissible New Opinion — Preclusion Is Drastic, Imposed Rarely (Good Quotes)

  Coene v. 3M Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128150 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 11, 2014): 2. Analysis Rule 26(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a written expert report must contain "a complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and the basis and reasons for ...
Coene v. 3M Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128150 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 11, 2014): 2. Analysis Rule 26(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a written expert report must contain "a complete statement of all opinions the witness…
Continue Reading

28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)’s New Exception Allowing Removal after One Year If Plaintiff Acted in Bad Faith — Two Part Test — Reasons Plaintiffs Prefer State to Federal Court

Aguayo v. AMCO Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160244 (D.N.M. Oct. 31, 2014): THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand, filed May 28, 2014 (Doc. 12)("Motion"). The Court held a hearing on August 7, 2014. The primary issue is whether the Court should grant the Motion ...
Aguayo v. AMCO Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160244 (D.N.M. Oct. 31, 2014): THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand, filed May 28, 2014 (Doc. 12)("Motion"). The Court held a hearing on August 7, …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — A Federal District Court Is Permitted to Take Judicial Notice of Another Court’s Website

United States v. Newsome, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150659 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 23, 2014): Newsome's second objection is to the Report's reference to the Montgomery County Clerk of Court's website for the indictment in Newsome's felonious assault case. He says this is a "clear and obvious error," but he doesn't sa ...
United States v. Newsome, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150659 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 23, 2014): Newsome's second objection is to the Report's reference to the Montgomery County Clerk of Court's website for the indictment in Newsome's felonious assault case. He says…
Continue Reading

Federal Jurisdiction — Grable — If Success of Claim Only Partially Depends on Federal Law, or Does So Only in the Alternative, No JD — If Claims Contradicted by Federal Rules with Force of Law, Then JD But Also Preemption Defense

Manning v. Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21362 (3d Cir. Nov. 10, 2014): After the District Court denied Plaintiffs' motion to remand this case to New Jersey state court, we granted their petition for an interlocutory appeal. The issue before us is whether there is federal-question jurisdiction over Plai ...
Manning v. Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 21362 (3d Cir. Nov. 10, 2014): After the District Court denied Plaintiffs' motion to remand this case to New Jersey state court, we granted their petition for…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Sanctions in the Form of Extra Discovery Costs Caused by the Spoliation, Including the Cost of the Sanctions Motion

Herson v. City of Richmond, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20467 (9th Cir. Oct. 21, 2014): 4. Finally, the district court did not err in granting the City's motion for sanctions. Courts may impose monetary sanctions in the amount of extra discovery costs caused by spoliation, including the cost of the sanctions motion. ...
Herson v. City of Richmond, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20467 (9th Cir. Oct. 21, 2014): 4. Finally, the district court did not err in granting the City's motion for sanctions. Courts may impose monetary sanctions in the amount of extra …
Continue Reading
Previous225226227228229230231Next

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