Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Complex Lit Blog

Brandi-Dohrn v. IKB Deutsche Insustriebank AG, 673 F.3d 76 (2d Cir. 2012): Petitioner-Appellant Anselm Brandi-Dohrn appeals from an Order dated November 16, 2011 *** granting Respondent-Appellee IKB Deutsche Industriebank AG's motion to quash subpoenas issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782. Under section 1782, a district court is permitt ...
Brandi-Dohrn v. IKB Deutsche Insustriebank AG, 673 F.3d 76 (2d Cir. 2012): Petitioner-Appellant Anselm Brandi-Dohrn appeals from an Order dated November 16, 2011 *** granting Respondent-Appellee IKB Deutsche Industriebank AG’s motion to quash subpoenas issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §…
Roberts v. Am. Bank & Trust Co., 835 F. Supp. 2d 183 (E.D. La. 2011): The American Bank Defendants have moved to dismiss Plaintiff's claims of violation of the automatic stay, arguing that this Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the claim and that Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The United States ...
Roberts v. Am. Bank & Trust Co., 835 F. Supp. 2d 183 (E.D. La. 2011): The American Bank Defendants have moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims of violation of the automatic stay, arguing that this Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the…
Sky Harbor Air Serv. v. Reams, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 14899 (10th Cir. July 20, 2012): The illegality of a contract is a defense that "a party must affirmatively state" in a pleading. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(c)(1); see also Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, Local Union Nos. 12, 111, 113, 969 v. Prof'l Hole Drilling, Inc., 574 F.2d 497, 500 (10th ...
Sky Harbor Air Serv. v. Reams, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 14899 (10th Cir. July 20, 2012): The illegality of a contract is a defense that “a party must affirmatively state” in a pleading. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(c)(1); see…
Haynes v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15102 (9th Cir. July 23, 2012): Gregory Haynes ("Haynes") was the counsel for the plaintiff in the underlying action. The district court determined that Haynes continued pursuit of plaintiff's claims, after it was clear that the claims were frivolous and in bad faith. The cou ...
Haynes v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15102 (9th Cir. July 23, 2012): Gregory Haynes (“Haynes”) was the counsel for the plaintiff in the underlying action. The district court determined that Haynes continued pursuit of…
Olson v. Reynolds, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 13167 (7th Cir. June 27, 2012): We turn next to the denial of sanctions under section 1927. Under this provision, a court may in its discretion impose sanctions only upon a finding of bad faith-meaning extreme negligence, "serious and studied disregard for the orderly process of justice," pursuit ...
Olson v. Reynolds, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 13167 (7th Cir. June 27, 2012): We turn next to the denial of sanctions under section 1927. Under this provision, a court may in its discretion impose sanctions only upon a finding of…
Patel v. Patel (In re Patel), 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 3277 (Bankr. D. N.M. July 13, 2012): Plaintiffs ask the court to strike the changes that Dipak Patel and Padma Patel have made to their deposition transcripts. Pursuant to Rule 30(e), a deponent is permitted to make "changes in form or substance" to a deposition transcript by signing a ...
Patel v. Patel (In re Patel), 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 3277 (Bankr. D. N.M. July 13, 2012): Plaintiffs ask the court to strike the changes that Dipak Patel and Padma Patel have made to their deposition transcripts. Pursuant to Rule 30(e),…
O'Leary v. Kaupas, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95769 (S.D.N.Y. July 11,2012): Defendant Paul Kaupas ("Kaupas") moves this Court to bar the testimony of three of Plaintiff Marlis O'Leary's ("O'Leary") expert witnesses because the witnesses failed to submit written reports under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B). The three expert witn ...
O’Leary v. Kaupas, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95769 (S.D.N.Y. July 11,2012): Defendant Paul Kaupas (“Kaupas”) moves this Court to bar the testimony of three of Plaintiff Marlis O’Leary’s (“O’Leary”) expert witnesses because the witnesses failed to submit written reports under…
Jones v. Liberty Bank and Trust Co., 461 Fed. Appx. 407 (5th Cir. 2012): Racketeering activity is defined by reference to particular state and federal criminal offenses. See 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). Jones's factual allegations, taken as true, indicate that (1) he was repeatedly deprived of access to federal and state financial assistance p ...
Jones v. Liberty Bank and Trust Co., 461 Fed. Appx. 407 (5th Cir. 2012): Racketeering activity is defined by reference to particular state and federal criminal offenses. See 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). Jones’s factual allegations, taken as true, indicate that…
Keller v. Strauss, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 13867 (11th Cir. July 9, 2012): Gerald Keller appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal with prejudice of his federal claims and dismissal without prejudice of his state-law claims, which Keller brought in a civil action seeking damages for: (1) medical negligence; (2) breach of contract; ...
Keller v. Strauss, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 13867 (11th Cir. July 9, 2012): Gerald Keller appeals pro se from the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of his federal claims and dismissal without prejudice of his state-law claims, which Keller brought…
Fialkowski v. Perry, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91165 (E.D. Pa. June 29, 2012): The present discovery dispute arises from defendants' request that plaintiff produce materials that plaintiff's expert witness, certified public accountant Howard Lapensohn, identified in paragraph 17 of the "Document Review" portion of the written report he prep ...
Fialkowski v. Perry, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91165 (E.D. Pa. June 29, 2012): The present discovery dispute arises from defendants’ request that plaintiff produce materials that plaintiff’s expert witness, certified public accountant Howard Lapensohn, identified in paragraph 17 of the…

Recent Posts

Archives