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

“Confusing Overlap” of Contempt vs. Other Sanctions Powers — Higher Burden of Proof If Contempt — Judge’s Duty to Justify Sanctions Imposed (Good Quote)

Securities and Exchange Commission v. First Choice Mgmt. Servs., Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8788 (7th Cir. May 1, 2012): So the order was violated; but was the sanction proper? Judges have inherent authority to impose sanctions for misconduct by litigants, their lawyers, witnesses, and others who participate in a lawsuit over which the j ...
Securities and Exchange Commission v. First Choice Mgmt. Servs., Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8788 (7th Cir. May 1, 2012): So the order was violated; but was the sanction proper? Judges have inherent authority to impose sanctions for misconduct by…
Continue Reading

Email Admissibility — Double Hearsay Satisfied by (1) Business Record Incorporating (2) Admission — 801(d)(2)(B) Does Not Require Employee Have Ability to Bind Employer — Junior Status of Employee Goes to Weight

In re Tribune Co., 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 1563 (Bankr. D. Del. April 9, 2012): In preparing his response to the Bigelow Email, Peter Cohen of JPMorgan contacted another JPMorgan employee, Joachim Sonne, who advised by email: Talked to EGI, Chris Hochschild, and he confirmed that they see their security as the most jun ...
In re Tribune Co., 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 1563 (Bankr. D. Del. April 9, 2012): In preparing his response to the Bigelow Email, Peter Cohen of JPMorgan contacted another JPMorgan employee, Joachim Sonne, who advised by email: Talked to EGI, Chris…
Continue Reading

Testimony Based on Newspaper Reports Is Hearsay — Documents Seized from PLO Not Admissible under Residual Exception —Rule 807 Standards — Lay Opinion May Not Include Specialized Knowledge or Legal Opinion

United States v. El-Mezain, 664 F.3d 467 (5th Cir. 2011): In this consolidated case, we address the appeals of five individuals and one corporate defendant convicted of conspiracy and substantive offenses for providing material aid and support to a designated terrorist organization. The terrorist organization at issue is Hamas, which in ...
United States v. El-Mezain, 664 F.3d 467 (5th Cir. 2011): In this consolidated case, we address the appeals of five individuals and one corporate defendant convicted of conspiracy and substantive offenses for providing material aid and support to a designated…
Continue Reading

Rule 408 Exclusion of Attorney Conversation Erroneous Where There Was No Pending Dispute — Note Importance of Announcing Intent to Maintain Settlement Offers Confidential

MCI Commc’ns Servs., Inc. v. Hagan, 641 F.3d 112; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 9699 (5th Cir. 2011): This case arises from a January 20, 2006 incident in which an underground cable owned by plaintiff-appellant MCI was allegedly severed. MCI filed suit against defendants-appellees Wayne Hagan and James Joubert, alleging that Joubert was neglig ...
MCI Commc’ns Servs., Inc. v. Hagan, 641 F.3d 112; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 9699 (5th Cir. 2011): This case arises from a January 20, 2006 incident in which an underground cable owned by plaintiff-appellant MCI was allegedly severed. MCI filed…
Continue Reading

Class Action Fairness Act — Parens Patriae Action Brought on Behalf of All State Citizens pursuant to State Statute Falls within CAFA’s General Public Exception and Must be Remanded to State Court

State ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62089 (S.D. Miss. May 3, 2012): On March 25, 2011, the State of Mississippi filed a complaint in the Chancery Court of Hinds County alleging that the defendants had engaged in price-fixing in violation of the Mississippi Consumer Protection Act ("MCPA"), Miss. Code § 75-24 ...
State ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62089 (S.D. Miss. May 3, 2012): On March 25, 2011, the State of Mississippi filed a complaint in the Chancery Court of Hinds County alleging that the defendants…
Continue Reading

Social Media — Chats and Texts Authenticated by One Party to Conversations Who Lacked Motive to Falsify — Corroborating Circumstances for Text Authentication

United States v Lundy, 2012 WL 1021795 (5th Cir. Mar. 28, 2012): In August 2006, Lundy was a 23 year old attending Delta State College in Cleveland, Mississippi and residing in Hollandale, Mississippi. Using the name ‘Jarious Johnson’, Lundy made contact with and engaged in a string of sexually laced text message and phone conversat ...
United States v Lundy, 2012 WL 1021795 (5th Cir. Mar. 28, 2012): In August 2006, Lundy was a 23 year old attending Delta State College in Cleveland, Mississippi and residing in Hollandale, Mississippi. Using the name ‘Jarious Johnson’, Lundy made…
Continue Reading

However Liberally Construed, Pro Se Complaint Must Still Contain Sufficient Facts to Satisfy Twiqbal

Pieczenik v. Bayer Corp., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5986 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 22, 2012) (RICO / copyright infringement action): In general, pro se litigants are held to a lesser standard than pleadings drafted by lawyers when determining whether a complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 9-10 (1980). ...
Pieczenik v. Bayer Corp., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5986 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 22, 2012) (RICO / copyright infringement action): In general, pro se litigants are held to a lesser standard than pleadings drafted by lawyers when determining whether a complaint…
Continue Reading

Email Authentication Standards in New Hampshire (Applying Authentication Rule Identical to Fed.R.Evid. 901)

State v. Ruggiero, 163 N.H. 129, 35 A.3d 616 (2011): New Hampshire Rule of Evidence 901(a) provides that "[t]he requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims." The proof necess ...
State v. Ruggiero, 163 N.H. 129, 35 A.3d 616 (2011): New Hampshire Rule of Evidence 901(a) provides that “[t]he requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that…
Continue Reading

Foreign Government Is Not a “Person” within 28 U.S.C. § 1782 from Whom Discovery May Be Compelled for Use in a Foreign or International Proceeding

Thai-Lao (Thailand) Co. v. Gov’t of the Lao People’s Democratic Rep., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37915 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2012): 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) authorizes a federal district court to assist a foreign or international tribunal, or a person interested in a proceeding before such a tribunal, to obtain testimony, documents, or other di ...
Thai-Lao (Thailand) Co. v. Gov’t of the Lao People’s Democratic Rep., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37915 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2012): 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) authorizes a federal district court to assist a foreign or international tribunal, or a person interested…
Continue Reading

While Negligence May Support an Adverse Inference for Spoliation in the Second Circuit, It Is within the District Court’s Discretion to Deny that Sanction

Twitty v. Salius, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1115, 2-5 (2d Cir. Jan. 19, 2012): We first consider plaintiff's argument that the district court erred when it failed to give an adverse inference instruction in response to the erasure of the original intake videotape, which plaintiff characterizes as the "spoliation of the original intake video. ...
Twitty v. Salius, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1115, 2-5 (2d Cir. Jan. 19, 2012): We first consider plaintiff’s argument that the district court erred when it failed to give an adverse inference instruction in response to the erasure of the…
Continue Reading
Previous321322323324325326327Next

Recent Posts

RICO Statute of Limitations — Storm Warnings, Not Thunder and Lightning (Good Quote)

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

RICO: Employer Suffered Harm to Business or Property When Kickbacks Paid to Employees in Real Estate Transactions Done for Employer — Expert Testimony Sufficient to Prove Harm — Proof That Employer Paid Above-Market Prices Not Essential — Non-Disclosure of Certain Damages in Initial Disclosures Cured by Expert Report, Which Also Rendered Initial Non-Disclosure Harmless

Spoliation: Dismissal Under Rule 37(e)(2) and Monetary Sanctions Under Rule 37(e)(1), Implicitly Reading The “Or” Between 37(e)(1) and 37(e)(2) As Conjunctive, Not Disjunctive — Clear Error Standard of Review for District Court’s Intent (= Bad Faith) Finding under 37(e)(2)(C) — Additional Monetary Sanctions Imposed on Claimants under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and Rule 37(a)(5) — No Right to Jury Determination of Intent under Rule 37(e)(2) — “Substantially Justified” in Rule 37(a)(5) Has Same Meaning As In Equal Access to Justice Act and Thus Rule 11 — Meaning of “Unreasonable and Vexatious” in 7th Circuit

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

Rule 37 Default Judgment — Tenth Circuit Multifactor Test Is Not Exhaustive But a Non-Exclusive List of “Sometimes-Helpful Criteria Or Guide Posts”— Appeal from Preliminary Injunction Mooted by Entry of Permanent Injunction — Difficulty in Collecting Damages Award May Equal Irreparable Injury — A Monetary Award For Past Conduct Does Not Preclude A Permanent Injunction Against Similar Wrongful Conduct Likely To Occur In The Future

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

© 2026 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice