Complex Lit Blog

Spoliation: Permissive Adverse Inference Instruction Typically Appropriate for Negligent Destruction of Evidence Where Opponent Not Denied Ability to Make or Defend Its Case — Severity of Sanction Should Correspond to Degree of Fault

Arch Ins. Co. v. Broan-Nutone, LLC, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 26464 (6th Cir. Dec. 21, 2012): This case arises out of a fire that occurred at Montgomery County Fire Station 1 in Mt. Sterling, Kentucky, on September 17, 2007. Plaintiff Montgomery County Fire Protection District 1 was compensated for the resulting property damage by its insura ...

Sixth Circuit Spoliation Standards for Adverse Inference Instruction

Stocker v. United States, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1089 (6th Cir. Jan. 17, 2013): [A] "party seeking an adverse inference instruction based on the destruction of evidence must establish (1) that the party having control over the evidence had an obligation to preserve it at the time it was destroyed; (2) that the records were destroyed wi ...

Stocker v. United States, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 1089 (6th Cir. Jan. 17, 2013): [A] “party seeking an adverse inference instruction based on the destruction of evidence must establish (1) that the party having control over the evidence had an…

RICO Does Not Provide for Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction (Circuit Split) — “Transacts His Affairs” in RICO and Clayton Acts Are Synonymous

Pincione v. D’Alfonso, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25986 (2d Cir. Dec. 20, 2012): RICO's "Venue and Process" section, § 1965(a), "does not provide for nationwide personal jurisdiction over every defendant in every civil RICO case, no matter where the defendant is found." PT United Can Co. Ltd. v. Crown Cork & Seal Co., Inc., 138 F. ...

Pincione v. D’Alfonso, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25986 (2d Cir. Dec. 20, 2012): RICO’s “Venue and Process” section, § 1965(a), “does not provide for nationwide personal jurisdiction over every defendant in every civil RICO case, no matter where the defendant…

Fact that RICO Claim Would Not Exist But for Plaintiff’s Entry into Contract Is Insufficient to Permit Non-Signatories to Assert Equitable Estoppel to Enforce Forum Selection Clause — Court Will Apply Law All Parties Assume Is Applicable

Bahamas Sales Assoc., LLC v. Ginn Fin’l Servs., LLC, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 24887 (11th Cir. Dec. 4, 2012): In late 2006, Donald Cameron Byers purchased a lot in the Bahamas. His purchase contract contains a provision that requires all disputes to be litigated in the Bahamas under Bahamian law. Byers financed the purchase with a mor ...

When Person Acts in Dual Capacity as Expert and Non-Expert, Any Ambiguity as to Role in Generating Documents — and, Potentially, Communications — Is Resolved in Favor of Party Seeking Discovery

Paradigm Biodevices, Inc. -v- Centinel Spine, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7312 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 17, 2013): By letter dated January 9, 2013, Defendants sought an order requiring Plaintiff to produce a draft report prepared by Zolfo Cooper (the "Report"), an entity appointed by an English court as liquidator of Surgicraft, and other communi ...

Even If Rule 11 Violated, Court Has Discretion to Deny Sanctions — § 1927 Requires “Conduct Constituting or Akin to Bad Faith” — Once Claim Is Adjudicated, Res Judicata Bars More Litigation under Different Theory or Seeking New Remedy

WD Music Prods., Inc. v. Muller, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25990 (2d Cir. Dec. 20, 2012): We affirm the dismissal of WD Music's complaint for substantially the same reasons stated by the district court. In sum, WD Music's second state-court action was brought to a final conclusion by the New York State Supreme Court's dismissal on res judica ...

WD Music Prods., Inc. v. Muller, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25990 (2d Cir. Dec. 20, 2012): We affirm the dismissal of WD Music’s complaint for substantially the same reasons stated by the district court. In sum, WD Music’s second state-court…

RICO: Freeze-Out Merger Does Not Constitute Fraud in the Sale of Securities within PSLRA Bar — Shareholder Cannot Show Proximate Cause If Injury Is Derivative of Harm to Corporation

Amos v. Franklin Fin’l Servs. Corp., 2011 WL 5903875 (M.D. Pa. November 22, 2011), aff’d, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 868 (3d Cir. Jan. 11, 2013) (the following is from the Court of Appeals’ affirmance): Matthew P. Amos and twenty four other plaintiffs have appealed the district court's order dismissing their first amended complaint for ...

Sanctions — Distinctive Rationales and Intertwined Applicability of Rule 11 and 35 U.S.C. § 285 in Patent Cases

Raylon, LLC. v. Complus Data Innovations, Inc., 700 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (Reyna, J., concurring): II. Distinct Rule 11 and § 285 Inquiries Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 35 U.S.C. § 285 of the Patent Act offer courts distinct, yet overlapping, rationales for awarding an injured party relief. ...

“Purely Factual Material” in Work Product Document Not Subject to Production — Waiver of Privilege vs. Waiver of Work Product — Fed.R.Evid. 502 “Abolished the Dreaded Subject Matter Waiver”

Appleton Papers, Inc. v. EPA, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 26346 (7th Cir. Oct. 26, 2012): After the government alleged Appleton Papers Inc. ("API") and seven other companies caused $1 billion in contamination in the Fox River near Green Bay, Wisconsin, the government hired a consultant that prepared reports on the companies' responsibility fo ...

Appleton Papers, Inc. v. EPA, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 26346 (7th Cir. Oct. 26, 2012): After the government alleged Appleton Papers Inc. (“API”) and seven other companies caused $1 billion in contamination in the Fox River near Green Bay, Wisconsin,…

Inherent Power Sanctions: Bad Faith Required in 5th Circuit — Raising Patently Frivolous Legal Argument and Threatening Further Meritless Litigation = Bad Faith — Pro Se Litigant — Vexatious Litigant Injunction Must Be Tailored

Terra Partners v. Rabo Agrifinance, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 26291 (5th Cir. Dec. 21, 2012): On September 20, 2012, Steve Veigel sought to file a pro se amicus brief in support of Terra Partners. Steve Veigel has an obvious interest in this case. He is an authorized managing agent for Terra Partners, is a corporate officer for all fo ...

Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Spoliation: Permissive Adverse Inference Instruction Typically Appropriate for Negligent Destruction of Evidence Where Opponent Not Denied Ability to Make or Defend Its Case — Severity of Sanction Should Correspond to Degree of Fault

Sixth Circuit Spoliation Standards for Adverse Inference Instruction

RICO Does Not Provide for Nationwide Personal Jurisdiction (Circuit Split) — “Transacts His Affairs” in RICO and Clayton Acts Are Synonymous

Fact that RICO Claim Would Not Exist But for Plaintiff’s Entry into Contract Is Insufficient to Permit Non-Signatories to Assert Equitable Estoppel to Enforce Forum Selection Clause — Court Will Apply Law All Parties Assume Is Applicable

When Person Acts in Dual Capacity as Expert and Non-Expert, Any Ambiguity as to Role in Generating Documents — and, Potentially, Communications — Is Resolved in Favor of Party Seeking Discovery

Even If Rule 11 Violated, Court Has Discretion to Deny Sanctions — § 1927 Requires “Conduct Constituting or Akin to Bad Faith” — Once Claim Is Adjudicated, Res Judicata Bars More Litigation under Different Theory or Seeking New Remedy

RICO: Freeze-Out Merger Does Not Constitute Fraud in the Sale of Securities within PSLRA Bar — Shareholder Cannot Show Proximate Cause If Injury Is Derivative of Harm to Corporation

Sanctions — Distinctive Rationales and Intertwined Applicability of Rule 11 and 35 U.S.C. § 285 in Patent Cases

“Purely Factual Material” in Work Product Document Not Subject to Production — Waiver of Privilege vs. Waiver of Work Product — Fed.R.Evid. 502 “Abolished the Dreaded Subject Matter Waiver”

Inherent Power Sanctions: Bad Faith Required in 5th Circuit — Raising Patently Frivolous Legal Argument and Threatening Further Meritless Litigation = Bad Faith — Pro Se Litigant — Vexatious Litigant Injunction Must Be Tailored

Recent Posts

Rule 37 Discovery Sanctions: Ninth Circuit’s Five-Factor Test for Gauging Appropriateness of Dismissal — The Limited Utility of Rule 12(f) Motions to Strike

Inherent Power Sanction of Dismissal — Preponderance of the Evidence Burden of Proof, Not Clear and Convincing Evidence (7th Circuit)

§ 1927 Sanctions — Must A Lawyer Who Unreasonably and Vexatiously Multiplies Federal Court Proceedings Be Acting “As An Attorney” When Committing the Misconduct To Be Subject to Sanction under § 1927?

Rule 37 Sanctions — Unfamiliarity With Litigation Process Does Not Excuse Intentional Disregard of Court Order — Also Affirming Rule 26(g) Sanctions on Clients and Counsel for False Representations That All Responsive Documents Had Been Produced

Supreme Court: Notice of Appeal Filed After The Original Deadline But Before Reopening by The District Court Is Timely — It Relates Forward to The Date of The Order Making The Appeal Possible — Second Notice of Appeal After Reopening Unnecessary

Rule 37 Default Judgment: Second Circuit’s Four-Factor Test for Imposing Defaults and Three-Factor Test for Lifting Them

RICO: Cover-Up Within Limitations Period of Untimely RICO Violation “Was Merely A Continuation” Of The Original Injury And Could Not Be Used “As A ‘Bootstrap’ To Salvage [The] Time-Barred Claims–Declining to Apply Pinkerton Doctrine to Civil RICO Claims

Archives

New York Office