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

If 30(b)(6) Witness Adequately Prepared, Others May Testify at Trial on Subjects the 30(b)(6) Lacked Knowledge of — Experts Designated for Non-Trial Purposes (e.g., Class Cert) But Not Trial May Testify on Rebuttal at Trial

Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank v. Morgan Stanley & Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38787 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 20, 2013): A. Testimony of Plaintiffs' Witnesses on Subjects About Which Their 30(b)(6) Designees Disclaimed Knowledge Defendants argue that plaintiffs should be precluded from calling witnesses to testify as to key subjects about ...
Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank v. Morgan Stanley & Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38787 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 20, 2013): A. Testimony of Plaintiffs’ Witnesses on Subjects About Which Their 30(b)(6) Designees Disclaimed Knowledge Defendants argue that plaintiffs should be precluded from…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Standards for Award on Appeal under Fed.R.App.P. 38 and 28 U.S.C. § 1912

Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Smith, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 8869 (6th Cir. May 1, 2013): Also before this court is Plaintiffs' motion for damages and costs pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 38 and 28 U.S.C. § 1912. Section 1912 provides that, "[w]here a judgment is affirmed by the Supreme Court or a court of appeals, the court in its discretion ma ...
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Smith, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 8869 (6th Cir. May 1, 2013): Also before this court is Plaintiffs’ motion for damages and costs pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 38 and 28 U.S.C. § 1912. Section 1912…
Continue Reading

Despite Bankruptcy Court’s Inability to Impose Criminal Contempt for Acts Outside Its Presence, Injunction of State Court Case Upheld — Elements of Civil Contempt — Civil vs. Criminal Contempt

In the Matter of Lothian Oil, Inc. (Grossman v. Belridge Grp.), 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 9353 (5th Cir. May 8, 2013): Appellants/Cross-Appellees-the Anti-Lothian Bankruptcy Fraud Committee, Israel Grossman, and other individuals and entities-challenge a bankruptcy court's order enjoining their prosecutions of two state-court actions. The ba ...
In the Matter of Lothian Oil, Inc. (Grossman v. Belridge Grp.), 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 9353 (5th Cir. May 8, 2013): Appellants/Cross-Appellees-the Anti-Lothian Bankruptcy Fraud Committee, Israel Grossman, and other individuals and entities-challenge a bankruptcy court’s order enjoining their prosecutions…
Continue Reading

26(a)(2)(B) Expert Reports — Permissible Supplementation or Clarification v. Impermissible Sandbagging — Point of Rule Is to Eliminate Need for Deposition and Risk of Ambush

Eiben v. Gorilla Ladder Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59961 (E.D. Mich. April 22, 2013): The Sixth Circuit has held that "[u]nder Rule 26(a), a 'report must be complete such that opposing counsel is not forced to depose an expert in order to avoid an ambush at trial; and moreover the report must be sufficiently complete so as to shorte ...
Eiben v. Gorilla Ladder Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59961 (E.D. Mich. April 22, 2013): The Sixth Circuit has held that “[u]nder Rule 26(a), a ‘report must be complete such that opposing counsel is not forced to depose an expert…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions — No Bad Faith in Deciding to Dismiss Case, After Bad Result, for Purposes of Appellate “Panel Shopping” for Future Disputes (Good Quote)

Tex. Med. Providers Performing Abortion Servs. v. Lakey, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3971 (5th Cir. Feb. 26, 2013): Pursuant to this panel's order that all subsequent appeals in this litigation be referred to us, the State of Texas here challenges the district court's denial of its motion to recover about $60,000 in attorneys' fees from the ap ...
Tex. Med. Providers Performing Abortion Servs. v. Lakey, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3971 (5th Cir. Feb. 26, 2013): Pursuant to this panel’s order that all subsequent appeals in this litigation be referred to us, the State of Texas here challenges…
Continue Reading

Early Reports from Expert That Are Not Drafts of 26(a)(2)(B) Report Are Not Protected from Discovery — Interrogatories Seeking Expert Information Prior to Expert Disclosure Date Set by Court Are Premature

Amco Ins. Co. v. Mark’s Custom Signs, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53803 (D. Kan. April 16, 2013): This is an insurance subrogation claim brought by Plaintiff against the named Defendants resulting from a fire occurring on April 3, 2009, in a building insured by Plaintiff. (Doc. 31, at 2.) Following payment by Plaintiff, its insured "a ...
Amco Ins. Co. v. Mark’s Custom Signs, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53803 (D. Kan. April 16, 2013): This is an insurance subrogation claim brought by Plaintiff against the named Defendants resulting from a fire occurring on April 3, 2009,…
Continue Reading

RICO Pleading & Iqbal — Plausibility Does Not Require Negating Every Improbable Alternate Inference — Statute of Limitations — Mere Hunch ≠ Grounds to Investigate — Failure to Find Lawsuit May Not Reflect Lack of Diligence

Cohen v. S.A.C. Trading Corp., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 6798 (2d Cir. April 3, 2013): Patricia and Steven were married in 1979. At the time, Steven was a trader at Gruntal & Co. ("Gruntal"). In January 1986, Steven created S.A.C. Trading Corporation ("SAC"), and served as its President, while his brother, defendant Donald, served as Treasur ...
Cohen v. S.A.C. Trading Corp., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 6798 (2d Cir. April 3, 2013): Patricia and Steven were married in 1979. At the time, Steven was a trader at Gruntal & Co. (“Gruntal”). In January 1986, Steven created S.A.C.…
Continue Reading

§ 1927 Sanctions for Bad Faith Opening Statement

Sabatine v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 8579 (6th Cir. April 26, 2013): Sabatine filed a lawsuit in the Ohio courts against Paul Revere Life Insurance Co. (Paul Revere), alleging that Paul Revere engaged in bad faith and breached a disability insurance policy by terminating Sabatine's disability benefits. Sabatine ...
Sabatine v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 8579 (6th Cir. April 26, 2013): Sabatine filed a lawsuit in the Ohio courts against Paul Revere Life Insurance Co. (Paul Revere), alleging that Paul Revere engaged in bad…
Continue Reading

May a Testifying Expert’s Assistants, Who Are Also Consulting Experts, Be Deposed to Test the Nature and Confines of the Testifying Expert’s Testimony?

Apple Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47124 (N.D. Cal. April 1, 2013): Now pending before the Court is the parties' joint discovery letter brief concerning whether Apple should be compelled to produce discovery related to the work of two assistants to Apple's testifying survey expert. (Dkt. No. 113.) Specifically, Amazon ...
Apple Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47124 (N.D. Cal. April 1, 2013): Now pending before the Court is the parties’ joint discovery letter brief concerning whether Apple should be compelled to produce discovery related to the work…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Neither Prior Sanction Nor Explicit Observation of Frivolousness Affords Sufficient Due Process to Sustain Sua Sponte Rule 11 Sanction — Due Process Challenge Review Is Plenary, Not Abuse-of-Discretion

O.R. v. Hutner, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 2760 (3d Cir. Feb. 8, 2013): Appellant O.R. ("O.R.") and his attorney, Rotimi A. Owoh ("Mr. Owoh"), (collectively "Appellants"), appeal the October 13, 2011 and January 27, 2012 Orders of the District Court, denying various post-judgment motions and imposing a monetary sanction against Mr. Owoh under ...
O.R. v. Hutner, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 2760 (3d Cir. Feb. 8, 2013): Appellant O.R. (“O.R.”) and his attorney, Rotimi A. Owoh (“Mr. Owoh”), (collectively “Appellants”), appeal the October 13, 2011 and January 27, 2012 Orders of the District Court,…
Continue Reading
Previous275276277278279280281Next

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