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

For Rooker-Feldman (RF) to Bar Claim, Source of Injury Must Be State Court Judgment, Not Ministerial Act of Clerk Or Post-Judgment Conduct of Counsel — Concurrence: “Here’s to Urging [Supreme] Court to Give 1 Last Requiem to RF”

 Vanderkodde v. Mary Jane M. Elliott, P.C., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 5838 (6th Cir. Feb. 26, 2020): In Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp., the Supreme Court made clear that the
Vanderkodde v. Mary Jane M. Elliott, P.C., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 5838 (6th Cir. Feb. 26, 2020): In Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp., the Supreme Court made clear that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine—which prohibits the lower federal courts …
Continue Reading

Social Media Photo: Page Ownership Irrelevant If Photo Independently Authenticated — Presence of Depicted Persons in Court Allows Jury to Determine Identity, Evidence of Hair Color, Clothing, Happy New Year Filter Allows Determination of Date

 Holmes v. State, 2020 Md. App. LEXIS 104 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Feb. 3, 2020): Appellant Jamar Lee Holmes was convicted by a jury in the Circuit Court for Harford County of attempted first-degree murder, attem ...
Holmes v. State, 2020 Md. App. LEXIS 104 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Feb. 3, 2020): Appellant Jamar Lee Holmes was convicted by a jury in the Circuit Court for Harford County of attempted first-degree murder, attempted second-degree murder, first-degree assault,…
Continue Reading

Even Though There Is No Safe Harbor in § 1927, Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Declining to Sanction Party Who Withdrew One Challenged Claim, and Attempted to Withdraw the Other, Before Opponent Filed Sanctions Motion

 Alcantra v. Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 5829 (9th Cir. Feb. 25, 2020) (unpublished): Defendants appeal the denial of sanctions against Plaintiff Correy Alcantra's counsel un ...
Alcantra v. Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 5829 (9th Cir. Feb. 25, 2020) (unpublished): Defendants appeal the denial of sanctions against Plaintiff Correy Alcantra's counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and 28 U.S.C. …
Continue Reading

Disqualification — Trial Taint—Meaning of Substantially Related —Subst’l Relationship Raises Presumption Confidences Shared — Lack of Recollection Irrelevant — Malleability of Memory — Pre-Indictment Delay in Moving Not Counted in Waiver Ana

 United States v. Huawei Techs. Co., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32144 (Feb. 25, 2020): On May 2, 2019, the Government moved to disqualify one of the defendants' attorneys, James M. Cole of Sidley Aust ...
United States v. Huawei Techs. Co., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32144 (Feb. 25, 2020): On May 2, 2019, the Government moved to disqualify one of the defendants' attorneys, James M. Cole of Sidley Austin LLP. Mr. Cole was Deputy [*2]  …
Continue Reading

Arbitration Clause Doesn’t Strip Fed. Ct. of Jurisdiction — Meaning of “Pursuant to” — Sanctions: Inherent Power (IHP) to Revoke Pro Hac Vice, R. 11 Improper Purpose for Determined Indifference to Merits, §1927 $ to Adversary & Ct. (IHP?)

 Royce v. Michael R. Needle P.C., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 5233 (7th Cir. Feb. 20, 2020): This dispute over attorney's fees has a long, tortured history. Not because it is unduly complex or involves novel le ...
Royce v. Michael R. Needle P.C., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 5233 (7th Cir. Feb. 20, 2020): This dispute over attorney's fees has a long, tortured history. Not because it is unduly complex or involves novel legal issues, but because one…
Continue Reading

Arbitration: Appropriate for Arbitrator to Apply Fed. Ct. Standards for Reconsideration & Arguments Not Timely Raised, Including First Raised on Reply — Doing So ≠ “Misbehavior in Any Sense” (Good Quote)

 Anderson v. Am. Gen. Life Ins. Co., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 5031 (11th Cir. Feb. 19, 2020) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: William Anderson, a plaintiff proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's de ...
Anderson v. Am. Gen. Life Ins. Co., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 5031 (11th Cir. Feb. 19, 2020) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: William Anderson, a plaintiff proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his arbitration award…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions Rejected for Reciting Correct Standard for Retaliation Claim But Mistakenly Citing Title VII, Not ADA (& Then Correcting Error) — Movant “Essentially Seeks $100,000 for An Inconsequential Typographical Error” (Good Quote)

 Alston v. Miss. DOT, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 4783 (5th Cir. Feb. 12, 2020) (unpublished): PER CURIAM:* In this pro se employment-discrimination c ...
Alston v. Miss. DOT, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 4783 (5th Cir. Feb. 12, 2020) (unpublished): PER CURIAM:* In this pro se employment-discrimination case, Jason D. Alston appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to the Mississippi Department of…
Continue Reading

Disqualification: Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction Is Decided before Motion to Disqualify, Moots DQ Motion If Jurisdiction Lacking

 Washington-St. Tammany Elec. Coop., Inc. v. La. Generating, LLC, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27177 (M.D. La. Feb. 20, 2020): 1 At oral argument, the ...
Washington-St. Tammany Elec. Coop., Inc. v. La. Generating, LLC, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27177 (M.D. La. Feb. 20, 2020): 1 At oral argument, the Court also heard argument on Louisiana Generating LLC's Motion to Disqualify Counsel for Plaintiffs. (Doc. 203.) …
Continue Reading

Sanctions: Dismissal for Shotgun Pleading (Defined), Dismissal Factors (11th Circuit) — Must Give 1 Amendment — Dismissal for Disregarding Order ≠ Abuse of Discretion, Especially If Warned — Pro Se Must Comply with Rules

Sarhan v. Miami Dade College, 2020 WL 428926 (11th Cir. Jan. 28, 2020) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: *1 Robert Sarhan, an adjunct professor at Miami-Dade College, filed several complaints in the underlying case against the College’s Board of Trustees, alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1 ...
Sarhan v. Miami Dade College, 2020 WL 428926 (11th Cir. Jan. 28, 2020) (unpublished): PER CURIAM: *1 Robert Sarhan, an adjunct professor at Miami-Dade College, filed several complaints in the underlying case against the College’s Board of Trustees, alleging violations…
Continue Reading

Facebook Message Authenticated by Admission of Authorship, Distinctive Characteristics Manifest in Other Writing by Alleged Author (AA), Contents Known Only to AA & Statements Someone in AA’s Position Would Make

 State v. Serrano, 2019 N.M. App. Unpub. LEXIS 499 (N.M. Ct. App. Dec. 13, 2019): P1 Defendant Sade Serrano appeals his convictions for two counts of criminal sexual penetration of a minor (CSPM), contrary t ...
State v. Serrano, 2019 N.M. App. Unpub. LEXIS 499 (N.M. Ct. App. Dec. 13, 2019): P1 Defendant Sade Serrano appeals his convictions for two counts of criminal sexual penetration of a minor (CSPM), contrary to NMSA 1978, Section 30-9-11(G)(1) (2009)…
Continue Reading
Previous29303132333435Next

Recent Posts

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

Spoliation: Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e) Imposes a Higher Standard — Intent — Than Fourth Circuit Law Previously Applied to Spoliation of Electronically-Stored Information (And Still Does As to Non-ESI) — Willfulness vs. Intent

Inherent Power and § 1927 Sanctions: Removal of counsel from case, referral for disciplinary action, and award of fees and costs for assaulting opposing counsel at deposition — Failure to request hearing waive any right to a hearing — Notice and opportunity to be heard required before sua sponte sanctions imposed, whether under Rule 11, the inherent power of the court or § 1927 — Notice may come from court or opposing counsel — Order imposing sanctions cannot provide notice of sanctions — Nature of bad faith requirement for inherent power sanctions: bad faith to obstruct the judicial process or bring about violation of a court order — Sanctions proceeding need not defer (Younger abstention) to disciplinary proceeding involving the same conduct — Sanctions proceeding doesn’t threaten to interfere with disciplinary proceeding — Why District Court is accorded significant deference in matters concerning attorney’s fees

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