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

Proposed Standard Voir Dire Jury Instruction Cautioning Jurors Against Social Media and Internet Use — Florida Supreme Court

From In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases — Report, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 961 (Fla. Sup. Ct. May 17, 2012): QUALIFICATIONS INSTRUCTION Many of you have cell phones, computers, and other electronic devices. Even though you have not yet been selected as a juror, there are some strict rules that you must follow about usin ...
From In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases — Report, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 961 (Fla. Sup. Ct. May 17, 2012): QUALIFICATIONS INSTRUCTION Many of you have cell phones, computers, and other electronic devices. Even though you have not yet…
Continue Reading

Class Actions — Circuit Splits on the Application of American Pipe

Barkley v. Woodbury County, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71747 (N.D. Iowa May 23, 2012): 3. The tolling rule for members of a prior putative class a. The general rule The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has explained the "American Pipe rule," as follows: In American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Ut ...
Barkley v. Woodbury County, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71747 (N.D. Iowa May 23, 2012): 3. The tolling rule for members of a prior putative class a. The general rule The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has explained the “American Pipe…
Continue Reading

Perlman Exception Allowing Appeal of Privilege Ruling When Documents Held by Third Party Does Not Apply When Order Directs Privilege Holder to Secure Production by Third Party — Presidential Exception — Impact of Mohawk on Perlman

In re Grand Jury ABC Corp., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10558 (3d Cir. May 24, 2012) (note: this opinion was withdrawn on December 11, 2012, in In re Grand Jury, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25318 (3d Cir. Dec. 11, 2012), which is subsequently excerpted on this blog in January 2013): ABC Corp., John Doe 1, and John Doe 2 seek to appeal ...
In re Grand Jury ABC Corp., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10558 (3d Cir. May 24, 2012) (note: this opinion was withdrawn on December 11, 2012, in In re Grand Jury, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25318 (3d Cir. Dec. 11, 2012),…
Continue Reading

Compulsory Counterclaims under Rule 13 — Competing Plain-Meaning and Real-Party-in-Interest Tests — What Is an “Opposing” Party?

Thayer v. Owens, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72915 (C.D. Utah May 24, 2012): Prior to July 2009, Homer Owens ("Homer") and Emerald Owens ("Defendant") lived together as husband and wife at their residence in California. Although the facts are incomplete, it appears that Homer has suffered from a form of mental illness or incapacity for some t ...
Thayer v. Owens, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72915 (C.D. Utah May 24, 2012): Prior to July 2009, Homer Owens (“Homer”) and Emerald Owens (“Defendant”) lived together as husband and wife at their residence in California. Although the facts are incomplete,…
Continue Reading

Rule 407 Applies in Contract Action — Bars Evidence of Post-Claim Change in Contract Language — OK to Grant New Trial Due to Error in Excluding Evidence under Rule 403 — Good Quote on Dangers of Limiting Cross

Reynolds v. Univ. of Pennsylvania, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10641 (3d Cir. May 25, 2012): Reynolds applied to and enrolled in the Executive Masters in Technology Management ("EMTM") program at the University of Pennsylvania in 2002 and claims that at that time he was told that the EMTM students would be considered graduates and alumni of Wh ...
Reynolds v. Univ. of Pennsylvania, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10641 (3d Cir. May 25, 2012): Reynolds applied to and enrolled in the Executive Masters in Technology Management (“EMTM”) program at the University of Pennsylvania in 2002 and claims that at…
Continue Reading

Contempt for Violation of Protective Order under Rule 37(c) — Standards for Contempt

Dorsett v. County of Nassau, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71445 (E.D.N.Y. May 22, 2012): Presently before the Court is a motion to intervene by non-party the Police Benevolent Association of the Police Department of the County of Nassau, New York, Inc. ("PBA"), to enforce this Court's December 15, 2011 Confidentiality Order ("Confidentiality O ...
Dorsett v. County of Nassau, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71445 (E.D.N.Y. May 22, 2012): Presently before the Court is a motion to intervene by non-party the Police Benevolent Association of the Police Department of the County of Nassau, New York,…
Continue Reading

Collateral Estoppel — Default Judgment Entered as a Sanction for Refusal to Comply with Discovery Order Has Preclusive Effect

Sartin v. Macik, 535 F.3d 284 (4th Cir. 2008): [E]very federal circuit court to consider the question has held that a default judgment entered as a sanction for refusal to comply with discovery orders has preclusive effect. See In re Ansari, 113 F.3d 17, 19 (4th Cir. 1997) (applying Virginia law); In re Docteroff, 133 F.3d 210, 215 (3d C ...
Sartin v. Macik, 535 F.3d 284 (4th Cir. 2008): [E]very federal circuit court to consider the question has held that a default judgment entered as a sanction for refusal to comply with discovery orders has preclusive effect. See In re…
Continue Reading

Class Actions — Impact of 2003 Amendment to Rule 23 Allowing Parties to Settle or Dismiss without Judicial Approval: Court Must Grant Stipulated Motion to Dismiss (Here, without Prejudice)

Sample v. Qwest Commc’ns Co., LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70927 (D. Ariz. May 22, 2012): On May 26, 2011, the parties to this action submitted a Joint Motion for Certification of Settlement Class, Preliminary Approval of Class-Action Settlement, and Approval of Form and Notice (Doc. 57). The proposed settlement sought to resolve trespa ...
Sample v. Qwest Commc’ns Co., LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70927 (D. Ariz. May 22, 2012): On May 26, 2011, the parties to this action submitted a Joint Motion for Certification of Settlement Class, Preliminary Approval of Class-Action Settlement, and…
Continue Reading

Does Rule 9(b) Apply to Claims of Negligent Misrepresentation? Circuit Split

From W&W Steel, LLC v. BSC Steel, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69432 (D. Kan. May 18, 2012): Footnote 14. See D&K Ventures, LLC v. MGC, LLC, No. 09-2084, 2009 WL 1505539, at *8 (D. Kan. May 27, 2009) (recognizing a circuit split with regard to whether Rule 9(b) applies to negligent misrepresentation claims and noting the Tenth Circui ...
From W&W Steel, LLC v. BSC Steel, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69432 (D. Kan. May 18, 2012): Footnote 14. See D&K Ventures, LLC v. MGC, LLC, No. 09-2084, 2009 WL 1505539, at *8 (D. Kan. May 27, 2009) (recognizing…
Continue Reading

Text Messages Insufficiently Authenticated Where Cell Owner Did Not Author All Texts on Her Phone and No Corroborating Evidence Was Offered to Show Her Authorship of Messages at Issue

Commonwealth v. Koch, 2011 PA Super 201, 39 A.3d 996 (Pa.Super. 2011): Appellant alleges first that the trial court erred in admitting text messages into evidence that were not properly authenticated. Appellant insists there was no evidence substantiating that she was the author of the text messages, nor evidence that drug-related texts ...
Commonwealth v. Koch, 2011 PA Super 201, 39 A.3d 996 (Pa.Super. 2011): Appellant alleges first that the trial court erred in admitting text messages into evidence that were not properly authenticated. Appellant insists there was no evidence substantiating that she…
Continue Reading
Previous309310311312313314315Next

Recent Posts

RICO Causation: Parents of Children with Disabilities Deprived In-Person Education and Services during the Pandemic Were Not Causally Injured by Teachers’ False Assurances to Federal Authorities That IDEA-Complaint Policies Were in Place, Which Caused Funds to Issue But Not to the Benefit of the Disabled Children — Damages Too Indirect — Proper Plaintiff Is U.S. Government — Private Injunctive Relief Under RICO Uncertain in Third Circuit

Sanctions: Rule 37(b)(2) Dismissal — Sixth Circuit Factors

Inherent Power Sanctions — Extrajudicial Misconduct: Sanctions Power Extends to Conduct Intended to Sabotage Court’s Ability to Adjudicate the Case Before It, Here, By Commencing State Court Actions Seeking to Enjoin the Federal Plaintiffs from Proceeding with Their Federal Litigation — Sanctions Fee Awards: The Factors Used For Calculating A Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Do Not Govern — Under Goodyear, the Relevant Inquiry Is Whether There Is A Sufficient Causal Link Between The Sanctioned Misconduct And The Fees Awarded

RICO: Members of Association-in-Fact Enterprise Must Act with a Common Purpose—Mere Allegation That Various Defendants Agreed at Different Times to Engage in Various Fraudulent Schemes Does Not Plausibly Support the Essential Inference, That They Acted with s Sufficiently Common Purpose

RICO Causation: (1) State’s Misrepresentation to Federal Government That It Was Providing Plaintiffs with Mandated Special Education Did Not Cause Plaintiffs’ Injury Because The Failure to Provide The Education Was Not Caused by the Fraud on the Federal Government — (2) The Three Factors for Assessing RICO Causation — (3) Limits of the Second Circuit’s Decision in Alix v. McKinsey That Causation Can Be Established Where A Fraud On The Judiciary “Or Other Governmental Entity” Resulted In A Resource Going To Someone Less Deserving

Rule 41(b): Five Factors to Be Weighed in Deciding Whether Dismissal Is Appropriate (Second Circuit) — Is A Finding of Bad Faith or Fault Required if Dismissal Is Without Prejudice? — Undecided If Truly Without Prejudice But It Is Required If the Without Prejudice Dismissal Will Act as a Dismissal on the Merits (Here, Because of the Statute of Limitations) — Failure To Consider A Lesser Sanction Than Dismissal Is Generally An Abuse Of Discretion

Spoliation Sanctions/Mootness: Stipulation Resolving “All Pending Discovery Disputes,” Which Are Enumerated, Does Not Moot Subsequent Sanctions Motion for ESI Spoliation — Postjudgment Sanctions Order Is Appealable When District Court Has Finally Disposed of Both Liability and Amount

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Default Judgment Appropriate Only As a Last Resort, When Less Drastic Sanctions Would Not Ensure Compliance with the Court’s Orders — (2) Default Judgment Sanction Requires Willful or Bad Faith Failure to Obey Discovery Order — (3) Fugitive Defendant’s Failure to Appear at Court-Ordered, Remote Deposition Despite Court Warning That Sanctions Could Follow Disobedience Warrants Default Judgment — (4) District Court Afforded Wide Discretion in Interpreting Its Own Orders — (5) Filing a Notice of Appeal from a Non-Appealable Order (Here, a Discovery Order) Does Not Deprive the District Court of Jurisdiction over the Case

RICO and Injunctions: (1) State Court Actions Designed to Perpetuate and Monetize a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable under RICO, Even Though They Are Not Themselves Alleged to Be Predicate Acts [Note: Noerr Pennington Applies in RICO Actions] — (2) Although Civil RICO’s Text and Legislative History Fail to Reveal Any Intent to Override the Provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act, Arbitrations Are Enjoinable Under the “Effective Vindication” Doctrine Where They Operate As a Prospective Waiver of a Party’s Right to Pursue Statutory RICO Remedies — (3) Arbitration Findings May Be Given Collateral Estoppel Effect in a Civil RICO Action — (4) Injunction of Non-Corrupt State Court Litigations That Furthers a RICO Violation Are Enjoinable Under the Anti-Injunction Act’s “Expressly Authorized” Exception — (5) “The Irreparable Harm Requirement Is The Single Most Important Prerequisite For The Issuance Of A Preliminary Injunction” (Good Quote) — (6) When Injunction Is Based on “Serious Questions on the Merits” Rather Than “Likelihood of Success,” Court May Rely on Unverified Pleadings and Attached Exhibits to Assess the Merits, Unless the Opponent Has Raised Substantial Questions (Here, the Opponent Failed to Request an Evidentiary Hearing) — (7) Whether Amended Pleading Moots An Appeal Turns on Whether It Materially Changes the Substantive Basis for the Appeal — (8) Meaning of “In That” (“Used To Introduce A Statement That Explains Or Gives More Specific Information” About A Prior Statement)

RICO: Fraudulent Concealment Must Prevent Discovery of the Injury to Toll Statute of Limitations

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