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

May Court Grant Rule 60(b) Relief Sua Sponte? Circuit Split

Reich v. Hallet (In re Hallet), 2011 Bankr. LEXIS 4992 (Bankr. D. Mass. Dec. 19, 2011): Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), made applicable to bankruptcy cases by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024, "[o]n motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for . . . mistake, i ...
Reich v. Hallet (In re Hallet), 2011 Bankr. LEXIS 4992 (Bankr. D. Mass. Dec. 19, 2011): Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), made applicable to bankruptcy cases by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024, “[o]n motion and just terms, the…
Continue Reading

RICO: Owners of Free Floating Vessels Not Subject to RICO Liability via Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act’s Provisions Extending US Law to Seabed and Permanently or Temporarily Attached Installations

Brown v. Offshore Specialty Fabricators, 663 F.3d 759 (5th Cir. 2011): This appeal involves a putative class action brought against several oil and gas companies and several companies that provide labor for offshore oil and gas projects. The plaintiffs allege violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) an ...
Brown v. Offshore Specialty Fabricators, 663 F.3d 759 (5th Cir. 2011): This appeal involves a putative class action brought against several oil and gas companies and several companies that provide labor for offshore oil and gas projects. The plaintiffs allege…
Continue Reading

Securities — 10b-5 Liability for Breach of Contract — Shingle Theory of Broker-Dealer Liability

Capital Management Select Fund v. Bennett, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 471 (2d Cir. Jan. 10, 2012): Former customers ("RCM Customers") of Refco Capital Markets, Ltd. ("RCM"), a subsidiary of the now-bankrupt Refco, Inc., appeal from Judge Lynch's dismissal of their Section 10(b) securities fraud claims against former corporate officers of Ref ...
Capital Management Select Fund v. Bennett, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 471 (2d Cir. Jan. 10, 2012): Former customers (“RCM Customers”) of Refco Capital Markets, Ltd. (“RCM”), a subsidiary of the now-bankrupt Refco, Inc., appeal from Judge Lynch’s dismissal of their…
Continue Reading

Arbitration: § 5 of FAA Authorizes Court to Name Substitute Arbitrator when Contractually-Designated One Is Unavailable and Not “Integral” — Circuit Split on Interpretation of § 5

Khan v. Dell, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1167 (3d Cir. Jan. 20, 2012): This appeal involves a matter of first impression for this Circuit — whether Section 5 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires the appointment of a substitute arbitrator when the arbitrator designated by the parties is unavailable.*** I. Factual Backgr ...
Khan v. Dell, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1167 (3d Cir. Jan. 20, 2012): This appeal involves a matter of first impression for this Circuit — whether Section 5 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires the appointment of a…
Continue Reading

Award of Expert Witness Fees as Inherent Power Sanction Where Bad Faith Litigant’s Proffer Excluded — Inherent Power vs. 35 U.S.C. § 285

Marctec, LLC v. Johnson & Johnson, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 3, 2012): A district court has inherent authority "to impose sanctions in the form of reasonable expert fees in excess of what is provided for by statute." Takeda Chem. Indus., Ltd. v. Mylan Labs., Inc., 549 F.3d 1381, 1391 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Use of this inherent a ...
Marctec, LLC v. Johnson & Johnson, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 3, 2012): A district court has inherent authority “to impose sanctions in the form of reasonable expert fees in excess of what is provided for by…
Continue Reading

Denial of Pro Hac Vice Application Due to Frequency of Appearance — Circuit Split as to Whether Pro Hac Appearance Is a Right or a Privilege

Mateo v. Empire Gas Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6398 (D. P.R. Jan. 19, 2012): Before the Court is pro hac vice attorneys Toby B. Fullmer and W. Douglas Matthews' show cause response (Docket # 97), requesting this court not to set aside their pro hac vice admissions in the case at bar. After a comprehensive analysis of the meaning and pur ...
Mateo v. Empire Gas Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6398 (D. P.R. Jan. 19, 2012): Before the Court is pro hac vice attorneys Toby B. Fullmer and W. Douglas Matthews’ show cause response (Docket # 97), requesting this court not…
Continue Reading

Cost of Letter of Credit Required to Support Supersedeas Bond Not a Taxable Cost under FRAP. 39(e) Even Though Cost of Bond Is and Cost of LOC in Lieu of Bond Would Be — Circuit Split

Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3552 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2012): The district court may tax "premiums paid for a supersedeas bond or other bond to preserve rights pending appeal." Fed. R. App. P. 39(e)(3). Hynix claims in excess of $8 million in premiums paid for the supersedeas bond it acquired, and in ex ...
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3552 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2012): The district court may tax “premiums paid for a supersedeas bond or other bond to preserve rights pending appeal.” Fed. R. App. P. 39(e)(3).…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Motion That Would Require Court to Decide Substance of Motion Subject to Bankruptcy Stay Is Properly Deferred until Stay Lifted

Wolgast v. Richards, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5704 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 18, 2012): Plaintiff's argument presents an issue of first impression: May a debtor, after filing a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition, move for Rule 11 sanctions in a pending case when the subject matter of the motion has been automatically stayed? Under the particular ci ...
Wolgast v. Richards, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5704 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 18, 2012): Plaintiff’s argument presents an issue of first impression: May a debtor, after filing a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition, move for Rule 11 sanctions in a pending case…
Continue Reading

Uncertain Application of Rooker-Feldman to State Court Judgments Still on Appeal in State Court System — Circuit Split

TC Healthcare I, LLC v. Dupuis (In re Haven Eldercare, LLC), 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3190 (D. Conn. Jan. 10, 2012): Ms. Dupuis was employed by a nursing home operator, Haven Eldercare LLC ("Haven"), which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2007. Before the bankruptcy, Ms. Dupuis and Haven entered into a tuition reimbursement con ...
TC Healthcare I, LLC v. Dupuis (In re Haven Eldercare, LLC), 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3190 (D. Conn. Jan. 10, 2012): Ms. Dupuis was employed by a nursing home operator, Haven Eldercare LLC (“Haven”), which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy…
Continue Reading
Previous323324325326327328329Next

Recent Posts

Inherent Power and FRAP 38 Sanctions — Inherent Power Sanctions (Here, A Deterrence Payment of $25,000 to the Court — Goodyear Issue Not Addressed) May Be Imposed in Addition to Statutory Attorney’s Fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 (Exceptional Patent Case) — § 285 Does Not Preclude A Separate Award of Sanctions Or Fees under Another Authority — Recidivism (25 Prior Lawsuits with Same Perceived Venue Deficiency) A Factor — Fact That Rule 11 Sanctions Were Unavailable Due to Dismissal of Lawsuit Opened the Door to Inherent Power Sanctions Under Chambers — FRAP 38 Sanctions Denied Because Issue Previously Unaddressed in Circuit — A Meritless Appeal Is By No Means Necessarily A Frivolous One (Good Quote)

FRAP 38 Sanctions Imposed Due to the “Striking Legal Emptiness” of Brief/Appeal, “A Legal Nothingburger” — Bad Faith Not Required: An Appeal “May Also Be Frivolous If It Is Filed Out Of Sheer Obstinacy” (Good Quotes)

RICO: Hobbs Act does not apply when the alleged extortion is meant to benefit the state

RICO: Indirect Injury Unrecoverable — Indirect Purchaser Rule Imported from Antitrust

Rule 11 Sanctions: (1) Improper Purpose of Harassment Reasonably Determined Based on Past Tactics (25 Lawsuits, 14 Ethics Complaints, and 150 FOIA Requests) As Well As Present Behavior — (2) Hearings Are Not Only Not Required to Satisfy Due Process But, If The Record Is Otherwise Adequate, Are Affirmatively Discouraged

RICO and Probate Exception to Federal Jurisdiction: Federal Jurisdiction over RICO Claim Not Barred by Probate Exception Even If the Federal Judgment May Be Binding on the Probate Proceedings (Or Vice Versa) — Calculating Damages Based on Diminution of Value of Estate ≠ Administration of the Estate — Doesn’t Matter If RICO Misconduct Includes Defendants’ Actions with Respect to The Estate

RICO: No Causation Where Harm Flowed Several Steps After the Fraudulent Acts — RICO Causation Same As Antitrust Causation

Sanctions vs. Automatic Stay: Imposition of Sanctions (Here, Inherent Power Sanctions) Is Subject to the Police Power Exception to the Automatic Stay in Bankruptcy

The Word “Include” May Be A Word of Limitation As Opposed to a Word of Enlargement, Depending on the Context

RICO — Pleading Conspiracy — Plaintiffs Must Plausibly Allege That the Defendants Knowingly Joined the RICO Conspiracy — Sparse Allegations of Knowledge of Fraud Due to Participation in a Commercial Transaction Insufficient to State RICO Conspiracy Claim Where Allegations Not Inconsistent with Ordinary Commercial Behavior — While Knowledge May Be Pled “Generally” under Rule 9(b), It Cannot Be Alleged Conclusorily and Must Satisfy the Twiqbal Plausibility Standard

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

© 2025 Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC  
Disclaimer | Attorney Advertising Notice | Legal Notice