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

Transmittal of Letter Drafted by Counsel Does Not Waive Privilege as to Investigation and Communications Leading up to Letter — Lawyer’s Testimony as to Process Insufficient

Le v. City of Wilmington, 480 Fed. Appx. 678 (3d Cir. 2012): c) Attorney-client privilege Finally, Le asserts that the District Court erred in refusing to compel testimony from a former lawyer working in Wilmington's legal department, Mr. Mili. During a pre-trial deposition, Le asked Mili specific questions about hi ...
Le v. City of Wilmington, 480 Fed. Appx. 678 (3d Cir. 2012): c) Attorney-client privilege Finally, Le asserts that the District Court erred in refusing to compel testimony from a former lawyer working in Wilmington’s legal department, Mr. Mili. During…
Continue Reading

Voluntary Dismissal — with or without Prejudice — Renders Order Compelling Arbitration Appealable; Stay of Action Does Not

In re Pharmacy Benefit Managers Antitrust Litig,, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 23432 (3d Cir. Nov. 15, 2012): AdvancePCS questions our jurisdiction to hear this appeal. Under the FAA, a party may generally not appeal from an interlocutory order "compelling arbitration" or "granting a stay" pending arbitration. 9 U.S.C. § 16(b ...
In re Pharmacy Benefit Managers Antitrust Litig,, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 23432 (3d Cir. Nov. 15, 2012): AdvancePCS questions our jurisdiction to hear this appeal. Under the FAA, a party may generally not appeal from an interlocutory order “compelling arbitration”…
Continue Reading

Spoliation Sanctions Inapt against Individual Where Plaintiff Put Only Entity on Notice of Possible Claim, without Notifying Individual of Prospective Claim against Him Personally — 10th Circuit Requires Bad Faith for Adverse Inference Instruction

Smith v. Nichols, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 16 (10th Cir. Jan. 2, 2013): Plaintiff-Appellant Tommie Smith, an inmate in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections ("CDOC"), appeals a jury verdict denying his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant-Appellee Sergeant Virgil Nichols, a CDOC correctional officer. 1 The jury co ...
Smith v. Nichols, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 16 (10th Cir. Jan. 2, 2013): Plaintiff-Appellant Tommie Smith, an inmate in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections (“CDOC”), appeals a jury verdict denying his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983…
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Counsel Still Caused “Excess” Fees within § 1927 Despite 42 U.S.C. § 1988 Award against Client for Same Fees — Default in Responding to Motion Suffices as a Substitute for Required Finding of Bad Faith (1 Judge Dissenting)

Young Apartments, Inc. v. Town of Jupiter, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 383 (11th Cir. Jan. 7, 2013): Appellants William Tedards and Michael Weeks, two attorneys who represented their client, Plaintiff Young Apartments, in this civil lawsuit, appeal the district court's imposition of sanctions on them in the form of attorneys' fees under 28 U.S ...
Young Apartments, Inc. v. Town of Jupiter, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 383 (11th Cir. Jan. 7, 2013): Appellants William Tedards and Michael Weeks, two attorneys who represented their client, Plaintiff Young Apartments, in this civil lawsuit, appeal the district court’s…
Continue Reading

Entity May Appeal Privilege Order to Disclose Its Data Held by Former Employee But Not by Employees’ Counsel at Its Request — Perlman Unaffected by Mohawk (Circuit Split) — Reasonable-Basis-to-Suspect-Test for Crime-Fraud Excepttion

In re Grand Jury, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25318 (3d Cir. Dec. 11, 2012): ABC Corp., John Doe 1, and John Doe 2 are subjects of an ongoing grand jury investigation into an alleged criminal tax scheme. As part of that scheme, ABC Corp., under the direction of John Doe 1 and John Doe 2, purchased and subsequently sold numerous companies. Th ...
In re Grand Jury, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25318 (3d Cir. Dec. 11, 2012): ABC Corp., John Doe 1, and John Doe 2 are subjects of an ongoing grand jury investigation into an alleged criminal tax scheme. As part of…
Continue Reading

Non-Signatory May Not Compel Arbitration Merely Because It Is an Agent of a Signatory, Even if Clause Extends to Agents — Dispute Must Arise Out of Agency — Equitable Estoppel to Compel Arbitration: Standards

Baldwin v. Cavett, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22777 (5th Cir. Nov. 6, 2012): Clifford W. Cavett ("Cavett"), Larry A. Turner ("Turner"), and Robert J. Wyble ("Wyble") are partners in the accounting firm Cavett, Turner & Wyble L.L.P. ("CTW"). According to the Second Amended Complaint, Cavett and CTW began providing accounting services ...
Baldwin v. Cavett, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22777 (5th Cir. Nov. 6, 2012): Clifford W. Cavett (“Cavett”), Larry A. Turner (“Turner”), and Robert J. Wyble (“Wyble”) are partners in the accounting firm Cavett, Turner & Wyble L.L.P. (“CTW”). According to…
Continue Reading

Eighth Circuit Continues to Reserve on Question Whether Spoliation Doctrine Applies in Criminal Cases — Indicates Bad Faith and Prejudice Would in All Events Be Required

United States v. Tyerman, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25350 (8th Cir. Dec. 12, 2012): This court has not applied the spoliation doctrine in a criminal case. United States v. Davis, 690 F.3d 912, 925 (8th Cir. 2012). Even if this court were to do so, a showing of the government's bad faith would be required. Id., citing Stepne ...
United States v. Tyerman, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25350 (8th Cir. Dec. 12, 2012): This court has not applied the spoliation doctrine in a criminal case. United States v. Davis, 690 F.3d 912, 925 (8th Cir. 2012). Even if this…
Continue Reading

Denial of Discovery Sanctions without Explanation Requires Remand — Contours of the Deliberative Process Privilege

U.S. ex rel. Williams v. Renal Care Group, Inc., 696 F.3d 518 (6th Cir. 2012): 1. The Alexander letter During discovery, the defendants sought evidence related to whether Medicare/Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) was aware of the RCG/RCGSC relationship. As part of this effort, they requested evidence rel ...
U.S. ex rel. Williams v. Renal Care Group, Inc., 696 F.3d 518 (6th Cir. 2012): 1. The Alexander letter During discovery, the defendants sought evidence related to whether Medicare/Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) was aware of the RCG/RCGSC…
Continue Reading

Sanctions Reversed Where Inference of Bad Faith Drawn in Part from Conduct of Others — “[O]nly Conduct Explicitly Referred to in the Instrument Providing Notice Is Sanctionable” —

Cameron Int’l Trading Co. v. Hawk Importers, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22294 (2d Cir. Oct. 25, 2012): Movants J. Curtis Edmondson and Scott D. Frendel (collectively "movants"), defendants' counsel in this matter, appeal from a January 18, 2011, memorandum and order finding that they violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b) and ...
Cameron Int’l Trading Co. v. Hawk Importers, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22294 (2d Cir. Oct. 25, 2012): Movants J. Curtis Edmondson and Scott D. Frendel (collectively “movants”), defendants’ counsel in this matter, appeal from a January 18, 2011, memorandum…
Continue Reading

Extraterritorial Application of RICO — Case Law Split as to Whether to Focus on Enterprise vs. Pattern to Determine Whether Statute Being Improperly Applied Extraterritorially

United States v. Chao Fan Xu, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 93 (9th Cir. Jan. 2, 2013): Viewed as a whole, the activities subject to count one encompass a unified scheme, wherein the Defendants: stole as much money as possible from the Bank of China; transferred the stolen funds out of China; escaped, through immigration fraud, to a safe harbor ...
United States v. Chao Fan Xu, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 93 (9th Cir. Jan. 2, 2013): Viewed as a whole, the activities subject to count one encompass a unified scheme, wherein the Defendants: stole as much money as possible from…
Continue Reading
Previous286287288289290291292Next

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