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

Do Rule 9(b)’s Heightened Pleading Requirements Apply to Negligent Misrepresentation Claims? — Three-Way Circuit Split

Lakeshore Eng’ring v. Richmond Utilities Board, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34223 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2014): HDR is correct in concluding that Rule 9(b) applies to state-law negligent-misrepresentation claims brought under Kentucky law. In Republic Bank, the plaintiff brought claims of both fraud and negligent misrepresen ...
Lakeshore Eng’ring v. Richmond Utilities Board, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34223 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2014): HDR is correct in concluding that Rule 9(b) applies to state-law negligent-misrepresentation claims brought under Kentucky law. In Republic Bank, the plaintiff brought claims…
Continue Reading

Rule 611(a) Summary Chart Introduced as Pedagogical Aide Must Be Linked to Admitted Evidence — Chart Proponent Bears Burden of Proving Admissibility of Summarized Evidence

United States v. Irvin, 682 F.3d 1254 (10th Cir. 2012): 1. Admission of Exhibit 1-2 The testimony of cooperating defendant Sparks formed much of the government's case against Miller and Irvin. Over the course of four days, Sparks described the various forgeries, misrepresentations, and other fraudulent acti ...
United States v. Irvin, 682 F.3d 1254 (10th Cir. 2012): 1. Admission of Exhibit 1-2 The testimony of cooperating defendant Sparks formed much of the government's case against Miller and Irvin. Over the course of four days, Sparks described the…
Continue Reading

PSLRA’s RICO Bar Applies to Extraterritorial Securities Fraud Not Actionable in U.S. — Key Is Nature of Conduct, Not Actionability — If One Prong of Conduct Is Barred, Entire Scheme Barred

Perkumpulan Investor Crisis Center Dressel – WBG v. Wong, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33797 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 14, 2014): C. RICO and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act Congress enacted the Racketeer Influenced  [*21] and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 ("RICO") to "seek t ...
Perkumpulan Investor Crisis Center Dressel – WBG v. Wong, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33797 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 14, 2014): C. RICO and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act Congress enacted the Racketeer Influenced  [*21] and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970…
Continue Reading

RICO — Failure to Plead Relevant Labor or Geographic Market Fatal to Claim Wages Were Depressed Due to Hiring Illegal Employees — Neither Injury Nor Causation Pled — Rule-of-Reason Antitrust Case Law Drawn On

Simpson v. Sanderson Farms, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4259 (11th Cir. Mar. 7, 2014): Plaintiffs Melissa Simpson and Sabrina Roberts appeal the dismissal of a putative class action suit brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68. In this case, we must determine whether these two ...
Simpson v. Sanderson Farms, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4259 (11th Cir. Mar. 7, 2014): Plaintiffs Melissa Simpson and Sabrina Roberts appeal the dismissal of a putative class action suit brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act,…
Continue Reading

Federal Jurisdiction — Court of Federal Claims Lacks Jurisdiction over RICO and Constitutional Claims Because They Do Not Mandate Payment of Money

Trevino v. United States, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4252 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 7, 2014): Fourth, the trial court does not have jurisdiction over Ms. Treviño's RICO claims or her claims under the due process, equal protection or supremacy clauses of the United States Constitution. These claims do not fall within the court's juris ...
Trevino v. United States, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4252 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 7, 2014): Fourth, the trial court does not have jurisdiction over Ms. Treviño's RICO claims or her claims under the due process, equal protection or supremacy clauses of …
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Bad Faith Required for Fees as a Spoliation Sanction (Ninth Circuit), at Least under Inherent Power — “‘Perhaps’ Doesn’t Mean ‘Yes,’ It Means ‘Perhaps’” (Good Quote)

Joseph v. Linehaul Logistics, Inc., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24434 (9th Cir. Dec. 5, 2013): Arlene Joseph sued LineHaul Logistics for wrongful discharge and unpaid overtime. A jury found for Joseph as to wrongful discharge and for LineHaul as to overtime. Post-trial motions were filed and denied, judgment was entered, and both parties ap ...
Joseph v. Linehaul Logistics, Inc., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24434 (9th Cir. Dec. 5, 2013): Arlene Joseph sued LineHaul Logistics for wrongful discharge and unpaid overtime. A jury found for Joseph as to wrongful discharge and for LineHaul as to…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — $413 Million Default Affirmed — Testimony Incredible in Part May Be Wholly Rejected — Diligent Efforts Needed to Show Compliance with Discovery Order Impossible — Damages Undisturbed Unless Plainly Excessive — Evidence for Contempt

Domanus v. Lewicki, 742 F.3d 290 (7th Cir. 2014): Adam Swiech, Richard Swiech, and Derek Lewicki received a host of discovery sanctions in the district court. These sanctions eventually led to the ultimate penalty, when they ended up on the wrong end of a $413,000,000 default judgment. In this appeal, the defendants c ...
Domanus v. Lewicki, 742 F.3d 290 (7th Cir. 2014): Adam Swiech, Richard Swiech, and Derek Lewicki received a host of discovery sanctions in the district court. These sanctions eventually led to the ultimate penalty, when they ended up on the …
Continue Reading

Text Messages — Authenticating Testimony from Provider — Admissibility as Computer-Generated Evidence, Business Records, Adoptive Admissions — Reading Aloud, Interpreting Contractions — Making a Record of “Dramatic” Reading

Chewning v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 2014 Va. App. LEXIS 82 (Va. Ct. App. Mar. 11, 2014): Eddie Wayne Chewning (the appellant) was tried by a jury and convicted of first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, in violation of Code §§ 18.2-32 and 18.2-53.1. These convictions were based on his participation ...
Chewning v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 2014 Va. App. LEXIS 82 (Va. Ct. App. Mar. 11, 2014): Eddie Wayne Chewning (the appellant) was tried by a jury and convicted of first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions — Burden of Proof — Compliance with Safe Harbor Mandatory — Alleged Failure to Confer Is Not Sanctionable

Kane v. Miser, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30668 (D. Az. March 7, 2014): Currently pending before the court is a "Motion for Violation of [Fed.R.Civ.P.] Eleven[,]" filed by plaintiff pro se Keith P. Nance (Doc. 88). Because there is no factual or legal basis for plaintiff's motion, the court will deny it. ***
Kane v. Miser, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30668 (D. Az. March 7, 2014): Currently pending before the court is a "Motion for Violation of [Fed.R.Civ.P.] Eleven[,]" filed by plaintiff pro se Keith P. Nance (Doc. 88). Because there is no…
Continue Reading
Previous246247248249250251252Next

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