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

RICO — Physical Injuries Not Compensable under §1964(d) — §1961(1) List of Predicates Is Exclusive — Municipalities: Doctrine of Acquiescence

Otworth v. Budnik, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22378 (6th Cir. Nov. 21, 2014): A. RICO In order properly to allege a RICO claim, Otworth must show "'(1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity.'" Heinrich v. Waiting Angels Adoption Servs., Inc
Otworth v. Budnik, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22378 (6th Cir. Nov. 21, 2014): A. RICO In order properly to allege a RICO claim, Otworth must show "'(1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity.'"…
Continue Reading

Is Pretrial Discovery of Sensitive Financial Information Relevant Only to Punitive Damages Appropriate or Premature, at Least Prior to Summary Judgment? Case Law Split

Bakhit v. Safety Marking, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125684 (D. Conn. Sept. 9, 2014): The Court agrees that the information sought is generally discoverable to support a punitive damages claim. [*4]  Connors v. Pinkertons, Inc., No. 3:98 CV 699 (GLG), 1999 WL 66107, at *2 (D. Conn. Feb. 4, 1999). However, &q ...
Bakhit v. Safety Marking, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125684 (D. Conn. Sept. 9, 2014): The Court agrees that the information sought is generally discoverable to support a punitive damages claim. [*4]  Connors v. Pinkertons, Inc., No. 3:98 CV 699…
Continue Reading

Experts — Failure to Consider Compliance with Standards, Test, or ID Scientific Principles = Analytical Gap — Court Avoids Credibility in Daubert Inquiry — Must Make Specific Factual Findings as Gatekeeper

Heer v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20863 (10th Cir. Oct. 29, 2014): A. Exclusion of Expert Testimony Ms. Heer argues that, in granting Defendants' motion [*11]  to exclude Mr. Stolz's testimony, the district court applied the wrong legal standard by failing t ...
Heer v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20863 (10th Cir. Oct. 29, 2014): A. Exclusion of Expert Testimony Ms. Heer argues that, in granting Defendants' motion [*11]  to exclude Mr. Stolz's testimony, the district court applied the wrong…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Bad Faith Required for Dismissal Sanction (Eighth Circuit) — Failure to Request Lesser Sanctions Precludes Later Argument They Should Have Been Granted

Bisges v. Gargula (In re Clink), 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20177 (8th Cir. Oct. 21, 2014): I. Background Bisges represented Anne Clink in her [*2]  Chapter 7 bankruptcy case. After the case was closed, United States Trustee Nancy Gargula moved to reopen the case because she learned that Clink possibly had f ...
Bisges v. Gargula (In re Clink), 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20177 (8th Cir. Oct. 21, 2014): I. Background Bisges represented Anne Clink in her [*2]  Chapter 7 bankruptcy case. After the case was closed, United States Trustee Nancy Gargula moved …
Continue Reading

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
Previous231232233234235236237Next

Recent Posts

Rule 37 Discovery Sanctions: Ninth Circuit’s Five-Factor Test for Gauging Appropriateness of Dismissal — The Limited Utility of Rule 12(f) Motions to Strike

RICO: Employer Suffered Harm to Business or Propoerty When Kickbacks Paid to Employees in Real Estate Transactions Done for Employer — Expert Testimony Sufficient to Prove Harm — Proof That Employer Paid Above-Market Prices Not Essential — Non-Disclosure of Certain Damages in Initial Disclosures Cured by Expert Report, Which Also Rendered Initial Non-Disclosure Harmless

Spoliation: Dismissal Under Rule 37(e)(2) and Monetary Sanctions Under Rule 37(e)(1), Implicitly Reading The “Or” Between 37(e)(1) and 37(e)(2) As Conjunctive, Not Disjunctive — Clear Error Standard of Review for District Court’s Intent (= Bad Faith) Finding under 37(e)(2)(C) — Additional Monetary Sanctions Imposed on Claimants under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and Rule 37(a)(5) — No Right to Jury Determination of Intent under Rule 37(e)(2) — “Substantially Justified” in Rule 37(a)(5) Has Same Meaning As In Equal Access to Justice Act and Thus Rule 11 — Meaning of “Unreasonable and Vexatious” in 7th Circuit

Inherent Power Sanction of Dismissal — Preponderance of the Evidence Burden of Proof, Not Clear and Convincing Evidence (7th Circuit)

§ 1927 Sanctions — Must A Lawyer Who Unreasonably and Vexatiously Multiplies Federal Court Proceedings Be Acting “As An Attorney” When Committing the Misconduct To Be Subject to Sanction under § 1927?

Rule 37 Sanctions — Unfamiliarity With Litigation Process Does Not Excuse Intentional Disregard of Court Order — Also Affirming Rule 26(g) Sanctions on Clients and Counsel for False Representations That All Responsive Documents Had Been Produced

Supreme Court: Notice of Appeal Filed After The Original Deadline But Before Reopening by The District Court Is Timely — It Relates Forward to The Date of The Order Making The Appeal Possible — Second Notice of Appeal After Reopening Unnecessary

Rule 37 Default Judgment: Second Circuit’s Four-Factor Test for Imposing Defaults and Three-Factor Test for Lifting Them

Rule 37 Default Judgment — Tenth Circuit Multifactor Test Is Not Exhaustive But a Non-Exclusive List of “Sometimes-Helpful Criteria Or Guide Posts”— Appeal from Preliminary Injunction Mooted by Entry of Permanent Injunction — Difficulty in Collecting Damages Award May Equal Irreparable Injury — A Monetary Award For Past Conduct Does Not Preclude A Permanent Injunction Against Similar Wrongful Conduct Likely To Occur In The Future

RICO: Cover-Up Within Limitations Period of Untimely RICO Violation “Was Merely A Continuation” Of The Original Injury And Could Not Be Used “As A ‘Bootstrap’ To Salvage [The] Time-Barred Claims–Declining to Apply Pinkerton Doctrine to Civil RICO Claims

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