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

Disqualification — Neither a Court’s Decision to Disqualify Counsel Nor Its Refusal to Do So Is an Appealable Final Order — Nor Is a Bankruptcy Judge’s Decision to Appoint Counsel, Or Not to Do So

In re Danner (Danner v. U.S. Trustee), 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24798 (9th Cir. Dec. 13, 2013): The debtors in separate bankruptcy proceedings appeal decisions of the bankruptcy appellate panel affirming orders of the bankruptcy court, which denied a law firm's applications to serve as counsel to the debtors. Becaus ...
In re Danner (Danner v. U.S. Trustee), 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24798 (9th Cir. Dec. 13, 2013): The debtors in separate bankruptcy proceedings appeal decisions of the bankruptcy appellate panel affirming orders of the bankruptcy court, which denied a law …
Continue Reading

Experts, Privilege & Work Product — Testifying Expert’s Notes and Emails with Other Experts and Corporate Employee Not Protected by 2010 Expert Witness Amendments — Good Quotes on Statutory Interpretation — Eleventh Circuit

Republic of Ecuador v. Hinchee, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 25102 (11th Cir. Dec. 18, 2013) (note:  this appeal affirms the decision excerpted in our posting of January 4, 2013): Respondent-Appellant Dr. Robert Hinchee ("Dr. Hinchee"), who resides in Florida, and Intervenor-Appellant Chevron Corporation ("Chevron&qu ...
Republic of Ecuador v. Hinchee, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 25102 (11th Cir. Dec. 18, 2013) (note:  this appeal affirms the decision excerpted in our posting of January 4, 2013): Respondent-Appellant Dr. Robert Hinchee ("Dr. Hinchee"), who resides in Florida, and…
Continue Reading

“Terrorism Is the Modern-Day Equivalent of the Bubonic Plague: It Is an Existential Threat” — Good Quote

United States v. Mehanna, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 22893 (1st Cir. Nov. 13, 2013): “Terrorism is the modern-day equivalent of the bubonic plague: it is an existential threat.”     ...
United States v. Mehanna, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 22893 (1st Cir. Nov. 13, 2013): “Terrorism is the modern-day equivalent of the bubonic plague: it is an existential threat.”    
Continue Reading

Reassignment of Case to Different Judge — Disagreement with Adverse Rulings ≠ Reason to Doubt Impartiality of District Judge or to Reassign Case — Good Quote — Recusal Not Sought — Obtaining Extension ≠ 1927 Violation

United States v. Gregory, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24300 (11th Cir. Dec. 6 2013): Gregory moves for sanctions against counsel for the government and for reassignment of his case to a different judge on remand, but his motions lack merit. Gregory requests that we impose sanctions against opposing counsel for obtaining an extension of ti ...
United States v. Gregory, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24300 (11th Cir. Dec. 6 2013): Gregory moves for sanctions against counsel for the government and for reassignment of his case to a different judge on remand, but his motions lack merit.…
Continue Reading

In Predicting How State Court Would Decide Issue of First Impression, Federal Court Sitting in Diversity May Be Aided by Looking to Well-Reasoned Decisions from Other Jurisdictions — Learned Intermediary Doctrine — Erie

Saavedra v. Eli Lilly & Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173055 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2013): The learned intermediary doctrine provides that a drug manufacturer has no duty to warn the ultimate consumer of potential side-effects of prescription medication, so long as adequate warnings are given to the prescribing physician. *** In tra ...
Saavedra v. Eli Lilly & Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173055 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2013): The learned intermediary doctrine provides that a drug manufacturer has no duty to warn the ultimate consumer of potential side-effects of prescription medication, so…
Continue Reading

Email Summarizing Conference Call with 3d Party = Business Record — Regional Disapproval of Local Project = Verbal Act and Is Admissible for Impact on Locality and under Residual Exception — Handwritten Notes of Call = Present Sense Impression

Orix Public Fin., LLC v. Lake Cnty., MN, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171547 (D. Minn. Dec. 5, 2013): In 2009, Defendant Lake County, Minnesota ("Lake County" or "the County") learned that it was eligible to participate in a federal loan and grant program that provides funding for the construction of broadband cable serv ...
Orix Public Fin., LLC v. Lake Cnty., MN, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171547 (D. Minn. Dec. 5, 2013): In 2009, Defendant Lake County, Minnesota ("Lake County" or "the County") learned that it was eligible to participate in a federal loan…
Continue Reading

Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint after Adverse Judgment Not Decided under Liberal Standards of Rule 15 But Stricter Requirements of Rule 59 or 60

C & L Ward Bros. Co. v. Outsource Solutions, Inc., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24468 (6th Cir. Dec. 3, 2013): I. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT Ward claims that the district court should have granted its motion to amend the complaint brought in its Motion for Post-Judgment Relief, due to the liberal standar ...
C & L Ward Bros. Co. v. Outsource Solutions, Inc., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24468 (6th Cir. Dec. 3, 2013): I. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT Ward claims that the district court should have granted its motion to…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Destruction of One of Many Identical, Allegedly Infringing Machines after Adverse Party Has Examined It Causes No Prejudice and Does Not Constitute Actionable Spoliation

Vistan Corp. v. Fadei USA, Inc., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24005 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 3, 2013): Appellant Vistan Corporation is the owner U.S. Patent No. 5,870,949 ("the '949 patent"), which is directed to an apparatus for pitting soft fruit, such as prunes and dates. Claims 5 and 12, the claims at issue in this case, recite a ...
Vistan Corp. v. Fadei USA, Inc., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24005 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 3, 2013): Appellant Vistan Corporation is the owner U.S. Patent No. 5,870,949 ("the '949 patent"), which is directed to an apparatus for pitting soft fruit, such…
Continue Reading

Disqualification — Court Must Rule on DQ Motion before Dispositive Motion — Partner’s Gender Discrimination Claim against Partnership Is “Substantially Related” to Past Representation of Partner in Attempting to Set Up Separate Practice

Bowers v. Ophthalmology Grp., 733 F.3d 647 (6th Cir. 2013): Bowers joined The Ophthalmology Group as an employee in 1999. In 2002, she became one of six partners of The Ophthalmology Group after buying into the partnership and signing a partnership agreement. On November 9, 2009, Bowers tendered a resignation letter to her partners ...
Bowers v. Ophthalmology Grp., 733 F.3d 647 (6th Cir. 2013): Bowers joined The Ophthalmology Group as an employee in 1999. In 2002, she became one of six partners of The Ophthalmology Group after buying into the partnership and signing a…
Continue Reading

Duty of Lower Courts to “Follow Both the Words and the Music of Supreme Court Opinions” — Good Quote

  United States v. Martinez-Cruz, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24084 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 3, 2013) (Kavanaugh, Circuit Judge, dissenting): As a lower court in a system of absolute vertical stare decisis headed by one Supreme Court, it is essential that we follow both the words and the music of Supreme C ...
United States v. Martinez-Cruz, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24084 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 3, 2013) (Kavanaugh, Circuit Judge, dissenting): As a lower court in a system of absolute vertical stare decisis headed by one Supreme Court, it is essential that we …
Continue Reading
Previous254255256257258259260Next

Recent Posts

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

Electronic Spoliation/Rule 37(e): (1) Finding of Recklessness But Neither Gross Negligence Nor Willfulness in Loss of Video Evidence Precludes Rule 37(e)(2)’s Severest Sanctions Because (i) No Intent to Deprive and (ii) Rule 37(e)(2) Displaces District Court’s Power to Invoke Inherent Power to Impose Those Sanctions — (2) Appellate Review = Abuse of Discretion, With The Caveat That Whether The District Court Applied The Correct Legal Standards Is Reviewed De Novo — (3) Inherent Power Is Often Available As An Alternate Source of Sanctioning Power But Can Be Limited by Rule or Statute, Something Which Courts Do Not Lightly Presume — (4) The Text of Rule 37(e)(2), As Confirmed by the Advisory Committee Note, Displaces Inherent Power to Impose the Sanctions Specified in the Rule or Any More Severe Sanctions — (5) “Intent to Deprive” in Rule 37(e)(2) = “The Willful Destruction Of Evidence With The Purpose Of Avoiding Its Discovery By An Adverse Party” — (6) Appellate Standing Conferred by Virtue of Issuance of Sanctions Regardless of Merits Outcome — (7) Value of Advisory Committee Notes in Interpreting Rules Enacted without Change Despite General Reticence to Rely on Legislative History

RICO: (1) Plaintiff Need Not Suffer Injury from Each Predicate Act to Establish Standing, And The Pattern May Include Predicates As to Which No Plaintiff Has Standing — (2) 7 Elements of a Civil RICO Claim (2d Circuit Articulation) Which Must Be Established As to Each Defendant — (3) Requirements of an Association-in-Fact Enterprise — (4) Each Defendant Must Personally Commit 2 or More Predicate Acts — (5) Pattern of Racketeering Activity: Horizontal and Vertical Elements — (6) No Requirement That All Members of a RICO Enterprise Joined at Inception — Can Join Over Time/Others Can Quit — (7) Cannot Charge 2 Predicate Acts Where One Action Violates Two Statutes — (8) A Footnote to Consider for Briefs: “Unless Otherwise Noted, When Quoting Judicial Decisions This Order Accepts All Alterations And Omits All Citations, Footnotes, And Internal Quotation Marks.”

For An Appeal to Be Timely, A Motion for Reconsideration in The District Court (A Rule 59(e) Motion) Must Be Filed, And Not Just Served within 30 Days of The Decision, to Toll The 30-Day Period for Filing An Appeal

There Is No Good-Faith Defense For Issuing An Overly Burdensome Subpoena

Purposes of Rule 37 and Section 1927 Sanctions

While Rule 11 Doesn’t Apply to Appellate Proceedings (Unless It Has Been Incorporated in Local Appellate Rules), Rule 11 Caselaw Is Looked to for Guidance in Interpreting Applicable Sanctions Powers on Appeal

Rule 11 Sanctions & Appellate Review: Abuse of Discretion Standard Applies Unless Sanctions Are Based Solely (Not Just in Part) on Legal Issues, in Which Case Review Is De Novo

Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions for Altering Expert’s 26(a)(2)(B) Report — Without the Expert’s Knowledge or Approval — by Converting It from PDF to Word, Changing Headings and Other Formatting, and Omitting a Page of Relevant Text and Appendices, Even Though Expert Testified That The Overall Substance of the Report Was Unchanged — Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions May Be Reversed If Failure to Comply with Discovery Order Was Due to Misunderstanding or Inability to Comply

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