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

First-Filed Rule Bars Federal Declaratory Judgment Action Filed after State Court DJ Action — Brillhart-Wilton Appears to Be Decisive— Unclear Whether Court Would Apply First-Filed Rule in Non-DJ Context, Where Circuits Are Split

Catlin Specialty Ins. Co. v. Plato Constr. Corp., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36494 (D.N.J. Mar. 19, 2012): a. General Applicability of the First-Filed Rule to Co-pending Parallel State and Federal Litigations Under the First-Filed Rule, "'[i]n all cases of federal concurrent jurisdiction, the court which first has possession ...
Catlin Specialty Ins. Co. v. Plato Constr. Corp., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36494 (D.N.J. Mar. 19, 2012): a. General Applicability of the First-Filed Rule to Co-pending Parallel State and Federal Litigations Under the First-Filed Rule, “‘[i]n all cases of federal…
Continue Reading

Reformation Due to Mutual Mistake Requires “Exceptional Circumstances” Where Sophisticated Parties Entered Detailed, Heavily-Negotiated Agreement — No Unjust Enrichment If Written Contract

Simkin v. Blank, 2012 N.Y. LEXIS 618 (N.Y. Ct. App. April 3, 2012): The parties, represented by counsel, spent two years negotiating a detailed 22-page settlement agreement, executed in June 2006. In August 2006, the settlement agreement was incorporated, but not merged, into the parties' final judgment of divorce. The settleme ...
Simkin v. Blank, 2012 N.Y. LEXIS 618 (N.Y. Ct. App. April 3, 2012): The parties, represented by counsel, spent two years negotiating a detailed 22-page settlement agreement, executed in June 2006. In August 2006, the settlement agreement was incorporated, but…
Continue Reading

Bad Faith Conduct Need Not Cause Harm to be Sanctionable — § 1927 Sanctions Imposable on Law Firms — District Court May Sanction Frivolous Appeals That Are Withdrawn — Entire Cost of Sanctions Motion Awardable Even If Denied in Part

Enmon v. Arnold & Itkin LLP, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6986 (2d Cir. April 6, 2012): The sanctions imposed on Arnold & Itkin arose out of Michael Enmon's attempts to obtain a subordinated loan from Prospect to complete his acquisition of Caprock Pipe & Supply LP ("Caprock LP"), a company in the business of purchasing, refurbishing ...
Enmon v. Arnold & Itkin LLP, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6986 (2d Cir. April 6, 2012): The sanctions imposed on Arnold & Itkin arose out of Michael Enmon’s attempts to obtain a subordinated loan from Prospect to complete his acquisition…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — Failure to Prove Evidence Ever Existed Precludes Sanction — Corporate “Best Practices” Do Not Represent Policy That, If Violated, Might Be Deemed Spoliative

Gomez v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Co.., 670 F.3d 395 (1st Cir. 2012): Plaintiff-appellant Armando Gomez, a Colombian national, sued defendant-appellee Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., after he slipped and fell while shopping.*** On June 19, 2007, the plaintiff entered the defendant's supermarket in North Andover, Massachusetts. While ...
Gomez v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Co.., 670 F.3d 395 (1st Cir. 2012): Plaintiff-appellant Armando Gomez, a Colombian national, sued defendant-appellee Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., after he slipped and fell while shopping.*** On June 19, 2007, the plaintiff entered…
Continue Reading

Notice of Appeal from Order Imposing Monetary Sanction Must be Filed within 30 Days — No “Separate Document” for Judgment Need be Entered under Rule 58 — Rule 54(d)(2)(E) Inapplicable — Nonmonetary Sanction?

Feldman v. Olin Corp., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3578 (7th Cir. Feb. 23, 2012): The appellants are lawyers who represented the plaintiff in this employment discrimination case. One of the defendants, Global Brass and Copper, Inc., moved the district court for sanctions, pursuant both to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b) and (c)(1) and to the court's inh ...
Feldman v. Olin Corp., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3578 (7th Cir. Feb. 23, 2012): The appellants are lawyers who represented the plaintiff in this employment discrimination case. One of the defendants, Global Brass and Copper, Inc., moved the district court…
Continue Reading

Are Experts’ Notes Discoverable Despite the 2010 Expert Witness Rule Amendments to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26?

Dongguk Univ. v. Yale Univ., 2011 WL 1935865 (D. Conn. May 19, 2011): “[A]n expert’s notes are not protected by 26(b)(4)(B) or (C), as they are neither drafts of an expert report nor communications between the party’s attorney and the expert witness. *** “However, under the work-product doctrine in Rule 26(b)(3)(B), the court mu ...
Dongguk Univ. v. Yale Univ., 2011 WL 1935865 (D. Conn. May 19, 2011): “[A]n expert’s notes are not protected by 26(b)(4)(B) or (C), as they are neither drafts of an expert report nor communications between the party’s attorney and the…
Continue Reading

Documents Produced after Discovery Cut-Off Date, without Judicial Permission, May Not be Relied upon by Producing Party or Its Experts

Techsavies, LLC v. WFDA Mktg., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152833 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2012): The Pretrial Scheduling Order (Docket No. 20) also requires that "[t]hirty days prior to the close of non-expert discovery, lead counsel for each party shall serve and file a certification that all supplementation has been completed." WDFA did n ...
Techsavies, LLC v. WFDA Mktg., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152833 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2012): The Pretrial Scheduling Order (Docket No. 20) also requires that “[t]hirty days prior to the close of non-expert discovery, lead counsel for each party…
Continue Reading

Internet Chat, Text and Instant Messages — Authentication, Best Evidence and Rule-of-Completeness Issues

United States v. Lanzon, 639 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2011): On September 8, 2005, Detective George Clifton, a member of the Miami-Dade Police Department's Sexual Crimes Bureau, signed online using the undercover persona "Tom." Detective Clifton created an AOL profile for "Tom" that described him as a male living with his girlfriend and hi ...
United States v. Lanzon, 639 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2011): On September 8, 2005, Detective George Clifton, a member of the Miami-Dade Police Department’s Sexual Crimes Bureau, signed online using the undercover persona “Tom.” Detective Clifton created an AOL profile…
Continue Reading

RICO — Corporate Defendant Is Not Distinct from Wholly-Owned Subsidiary Where Latter Is the Alleged Enterprise, Absent Allegations of Functional Separation between the Two

ISystems v. Spark Networks, Ltd., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6197 (5th Cir. Mar. 21, 2012): Spark Networks, the owner of the "jdate.com" web domain, won the rights to ISystems's "jdate.net" domain name in arbitration. ISystems then brought suit against Spark Networks ... for civil damages under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizatio ...
ISystems v. Spark Networks, Ltd., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6197 (5th Cir. Mar. 21, 2012): Spark Networks, the owner of the “jdate.com” web domain, won the rights to ISystems’s “jdate.net” domain name in arbitration. ISystems then brought suit against Spark…
Continue Reading

Anti-Suit Injunction Barring Pursuit of Foreign Lawsuit — Circuit Split as to Standards — Comity Defined

H-D Michigan, LLC v. Hellenic Duty Free Shops S.A., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14277 (E.D. Wis. Feb. 7, 2012): On January 24, 2012, plaintiffs filed an emergency motion in this court for a preliminary anti-suit injunction asking that I order defendant to dismiss the Greek lawsuit. It is well settled that I have the power to order person ...
H-D Michigan, LLC v. Hellenic Duty Free Shops S.A., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14277 (E.D. Wis. Feb. 7, 2012): On January 24, 2012, plaintiffs filed an emergency motion in this court for a preliminary anti-suit injunction asking that I order…
Continue Reading
Previous314315316317318319320Next

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