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

Under New York Choice of Law Principles, If Parties Assume or Agree That New York Law Controls, It Does

Tripoint Global Equities, LLC v. Fasolino, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150271 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 18, 2013): Having resolved the usury counts, the next substantive issue is the legal malpractice claim against Weiss in Count One. Both parties assume that New York law applies to the legal malpractice claim, but they do not directly add ...
Tripoint Global Equities, LLC v. Fasolino, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150271 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 18, 2013): Having resolved the usury counts, the next substantive issue is the legal malpractice claim against Weiss in Count One. Both parties assume that New York …
Continue Reading

Extension of 30-Day Period within Which to File Notice of Appeal — Factors to Prove Excusable Neglect or Good Cause

Hochstadt v. N.Y. State Educ. Dep’t, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 19418 (2d Cir. Sept. 19, 2013): We review "for abuse of discretion a district court's decision to grant or deny an extension of time to file a notice of appeal." Williams v. KFC Nat'l Mgmt. Co., 391 F.3d 411, 415 (2d Cir. 2004). Pursuant to Federal ...
Hochstadt v. N.Y. State Educ. Dep’t, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 19418 (2d Cir. Sept. 19, 2013): We review "for abuse of discretion a district court's decision to grant or deny an extension of time to file a notice of appeal."…
Continue Reading

§ 1927 Sanctions Are Imposable for, But Not Limited to, Dilatory Conduct

B. Willis CPA, Inc. v. Public Serv. Co. of Okla., 511 F. App'x 753 (10th Cir. 2013): Under a heading titled "The District Court Lacked Jurisdiction To Consider a Motion For Sanctions," Aplt. Opening Br. at 17, Mr. Dickson makes several arguments. First, he argues that "Section 1927 targets the vexatious and unreaso ...
B. Willis CPA, Inc. v. Public Serv. Co. of Okla., 511 F. App'x 753 (10th Cir. 2013): Under a heading titled "The District Court Lacked Jurisdiction To Consider a Motion For Sanctions," Aplt. Opening Br. at 17, Mr. Dickson makes…
Continue Reading

Does a Complete Offer of Settlement Made Prior to Class Certification Moot a Class Action? — Circuit Split — Impact of Genesis — District Court Decision Not Binding on Other District Courts

Kensington Physical Therapy, Inc. v. Jackson Therapy Partners, LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142527 (D. Md. Oct. 2, 2013): Plaintiff Kensington Physical Therapy, Inc. ("Plaintiff") brings this action against Defendant Jackson Therapy Partners, LLC ("Defendant"). Plaintiff asserts a putative class action claim under the Telepho ...
Kensington Physical Therapy, Inc. v. Jackson Therapy Partners, LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142527 (D. Md. Oct. 2, 2013): Plaintiff Kensington Physical Therapy, Inc. ("Plaintiff") brings this action against Defendant Jackson Therapy Partners, LLC ("Defendant"). Plaintiff asserts a putative class…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions Not Intended to Deter Novel or First Impression Arguments (Good Quote) — Local Counsel Allocated 25% of Penalty for Signing Frivolous Pleading — Acrimony as Requiring Greater Factual Inquiry

Walther v. McIntosh, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144730 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 4, 2013):   Dorothy B. Walther is the income beneficiary of the James Walther Revocable Life Insurance Trust. (Doc. 5, ¶ 14.) Howard Walther, her son, is a contingent remainderman beneficiary of the Trust. (Id.) These Plaintiffs brought suit in ...
Walther v. McIntosh, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144730 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 4, 2013):   Dorothy B. Walther is the income beneficiary of the James Walther Revocable Life Insurance Trust. (Doc. 5, ¶ 14.) Howard Walther, her son, is a contingent remainderman …
Continue Reading

Experts — The Helpfulness Threshold of Rule 702 Is Low — The District Court, Not the Court of Appeals, Is the Primary Gatekeeper

EEOC v. Boh Bros. Constr. Co., LLC, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 19867 (5th Cir. Sept. 27, 2013): Footnote 14.   The EEOC presented testimony by Dr. Liza Gold--a medical-school professor, board-certified psychiatrist, and author of a treatise on sexual harassment--regarding the nature of same-sex harassment from a psychological perspective ...
EEOC v. Boh Bros. Constr. Co., LLC, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 19867 (5th Cir. Sept. 27, 2013): Footnote 14.   The EEOC presented testimony by Dr. Liza Gold–a medical-school professor, board-certified psychiatrist, and author of a treatise on sexual harassment–regarding the…
Continue Reading

Applicability of Daubert at Class Certification — Circuit Split — Dicta of the Supreme Court “Should Be Very Persuasive” (Good Quote)

Moore v. Napolitano, 926 F. Supp. 2d 8 (D.D.C. 2013): Footnote 2.   In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541, 2553-54, 180 L. Ed. 2d 374 (2011), the Supreme Court suggested that a court should probably determine whether expert testimony is admissible under Rule 702 and Daubert   at the cla ...
Moore v. Napolitano, 926 F. Supp. 2d 8 (D.D.C. 2013): Footnote 2.   In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541, 2553-54, 180 L. Ed. 2d 374 (2011), the Supreme Court suggested that a court should probably determine whether…
Continue Reading

Appellate Review Is Waived as to Any Non-Dispositive Magistrate Judge Order Not Timely Objected to before District Court

Seto v. Thielen, 519 Fed. Appx. 966; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3953 (9th Cir. 2013): A motion for leave to amend is a nondispositive motion which a magistrate judge may properly decide. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); U.S. Dominator, Inc. v. Factory Ship Robert E. Resoff, 768 F.2d 1099, 1102 & n.1 (9th Cir. 1985), supers ...
Seto v. Thielen, 519 Fed. Appx. 966; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3953 (9th Cir. 2013): A motion for leave to amend is a nondispositive motion which a magistrate judge may properly decide. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P.…
Continue Reading

Class Actions — Adequacy of Representation Must Be Judge Independently of Fairness of Settlement — Utility of Subclasses — Civil RICO Liability Is Based on Predicate Criminal Conduct, Requires Conscious Wrongdoing

Charron v. Wiener, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 19977 (2d Cir. Sept. 30, 2012): B. Adequacy of Representation Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(4) requires that in a class action, "the interests of the class" must be "fairly and adequately protect[ed]." Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). To ensure that ...
Charron v. Wiener, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 19977 (2d Cir. Sept. 30, 2012): B. Adequacy of Representation Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(4) requires that in a class action, "the interests of the class" must be "fairly and adequately protect[ed]."…
Continue Reading

§ 1927 Sanctions: A case may be weak, but as long as it is not without circumstantial foundation, it is not frivolous (Good Quote)

Barnhart v. Lamar Advertising Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 14174 911th Cir. July 15, 2013): Section 1927 provides, in relevant part, that "[a]ny attorney . . . who so multiplies the proceedings in any case unreasonably and vexatiously may be required by the court to satisfy personally the excess costs, expenses, and attorneys' ...
Barnhart v. Lamar Advertising Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 14174 911th Cir. July 15, 2013): Section 1927 provides, in relevant part, that "[a]ny attorney . . . who so multiplies the proceedings in any case unreasonably and vexatiously may be…
Continue Reading
Previous265266267268269270271Next

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