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

When Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split, Its Holding May Be Retroactively Applied Because It Was Reasonably Foreseeable

United States v. Jones, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151102 (W.D. Tex Aug. 15, 2011): The Supreme Court has held that where circuits are split on an issue of law and the Supreme Court subsequently resolves the split, the newly articulated law may be applied retroactively because the potential for review is reasonably foreseeable.
United States v. Jones, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151102 (W.D. Tex Aug. 15, 2011): The Supreme Court has held that where circuits are split on an issue of law and the Supreme Court subsequently resolves the split, the newly articulated…
Continue Reading

Withdrawal of Assertion of Fifth Amendment in Civil Case Permissible Absent Prejudice to Opponents — Stage of Proceedings and Motivation to Game the System Key Considerations

Davis-Lynch, Inc. v. Moreno, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 549 (5th Cir. Jan. 10, 2012): This court has not ruled on whether and under what circumstances a party may withdraw its invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination in a civil case. Multiple Circuits, however, have addressed this issue, noting that it is depende ...
Davis-Lynch, Inc. v. Moreno, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 549 (5th Cir. Jan. 10, 2012): This court has not ruled on whether and under what circumstances a party may withdraw its invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination in…
Continue Reading

Rooker Feldman Does Not Apply until State Court Judgment Has Become Final — Inapplicable to Interlocutory Orders — Circuit Split

Persley v. Lee, 794 F. Supp. 2d 728 (E.D. Ky. 2011): While Defendant correctly argues that a lower federal court may not review final state court judgments, the matter before this Court has not become final. Thus, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not apply. The Rooker-Feldman doctrine precludes this Court "from exercising appel ...
Persley v. Lee, 794 F. Supp. 2d 728 (E.D. Ky. 2011): While Defendant correctly argues that a lower federal court may not review final state court judgments, the matter before this Court has not become final. Thus, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine…
Continue Reading

RICO Pleading and Particularity Requirements

Cory v. Straub Int’l, 2012 Kan. App. Unpub. LEXIS 10 (Kan. Ct. App. Jan. 6, 2012): Bill J. Cory, acting pro se, sued the defendants, Straub International, Ron Straub, and Scott DeWerff after he purchased from them a used piece of farm equipment known as a swather. He alleged the machine did not operate properly and the defendants had v ...
Cory v. Straub Int’l, 2012 Kan. App. Unpub. LEXIS 10 (Kan. Ct. App. Jan. 6, 2012): Bill J. Cory, acting pro se, sued the defendants, Straub International, Ron Straub, and Scott DeWerff after he purchased from them a used piece…
Continue Reading

Circuit Has Jurisdiction to Hear Immediately Appealable Issue — E.g., FSIA, Arbitration or Injunction Rulings — Despite Fact That District Court Simultaneously Transferred Case Outside Circuit for Litigation

Wye Oak Tech., Inc. v. Rep. of Iraq, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25945 (4th Cir. Dec. 29, 2011): In Technosteel, [LLC v. Beers Constr. Co., 271 F.3d 151 (4th Cir. 2001),] we held, "under any view of the jurisdictional limitations imposed by [28 U.S.C] § 1294(1) and its interplay with a [28 U.S.C] § 1404(a) transfer, precedent simply does ...
Wye Oak Tech., Inc. v. Rep. of Iraq, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25945 (4th Cir. Dec. 29, 2011): In Technosteel, [LLC v. Beers Constr. Co., 271 F.3d 151 (4th Cir. 2001),] we held, “under any view of the jurisdictional limitations…
Continue Reading

Spoliation — How Important Is the Electronic “Original” of a Document? — Dismissal Sanction Reversed Where Evidence Consistent with Inadvertence, and Originals Only Desultorily Sought — Unclean Hands Defense to Sanctions

Bull v. UPS, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 54 (3d Cir. Jan. 4, 2012): Bull, a part-time employee since 1986, injured her neck and shoulder on the job in late December 2005. Though she promptly reported the incident and requested medical attention the following day, there was a two-week delay before she had access to a company doctor. She a ...
Bull v. UPS, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 54 (3d Cir. Jan. 4, 2012): Bull, a part-time employee since 1986, injured her neck and shoulder on the job in late December 2005. Though she promptly reported the incident and requested…
Continue Reading

Does Rule 15(b)(2), Which Governs Amendment of Pleadings by Consent by Trying Unpled Issues, Apply at Pretrial Stage? Circuit Split — Reconsideration Standards under Rule 59(e)

ACE USA v. Union Pacific RR, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141228 (D. Kan. Dec. 7, 2011): Insurance companies ACE USA and ACE European Group Limited, as subrogees of AGC Soda Corporation ("AG Soda"), bring suit against Union Pacific Railroad Company, Inc. Plaintiffs allege that defendant is liable under the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate C ...
ACE USA v. Union Pacific RR, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141228 (D. Kan. Dec. 7, 2011): Insurance companies ACE USA and ACE European Group Limited, as subrogees of AGC Soda Corporation (“AG Soda”), bring suit against Union Pacific Railroad Company,…
Continue Reading

Order Disqualifying Counsel Reviewable by Mandamus — Contractual Waiver of Conflict Enforceable

From In re Shared Memory Graphics LLC, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 19414 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 22, 2011): This petition arises out of SMG's patent infringement suit against Nintendo, Apple, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., and Sony Corporation of America. SMG's claims against Nintendo--the only party that sought disqualification here--involve the "H ...
From In re Shared Memory Graphics LLC, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 19414 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 22, 2011): This petition arises out of SMG’s patent infringement suit against Nintendo, Apple, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., and Sony Corporation of America. SMG’s claims…
Continue Reading

Is District Court Automatically Divested of Jurisdiction when Party Appeals Order Denying Motion to Compel Arbitration? Circuit Split

Tillman v. Macy’s Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 510 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 4, 2012): "Whether an appeal from a denial of a motion to compel arbitration divests the district court of jurisdiction to proceed to the merits is the subject of a circuit split." Weingarten Realty Investors v. Miller, 661 F.3d 904, 907 (5th Cir. 2011). ...
Tillman v. Macy’s Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 510 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 4, 2012): “Whether an appeal from a denial of a motion to compel arbitration divests the district court of jurisdiction to proceed to the merits is the subject…
Continue Reading

Outside of RICO and Clayton Act, Statutory Phrase “By Reason Of” Generally Denotes But-For, Not Proximate, Causation

UMG Recordings, Inc.v. Shelter Capital Partners LLC, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25168 (9th Cir. Dec. 20, 2011): Veoh Networks (Veoh) operates a publicly accessible website that enables users to share videos with other users. Universal Music Group (UMG) is one of the world's largest recorded music and music publishing companies, and includes r ...
UMG Recordings, Inc.v. Shelter Capital Partners LLC, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25168 (9th Cir. Dec. 20, 2011): Veoh Networks (Veoh) operates a publicly accessible website that enables users to share videos with other users. Universal Music Group (UMG) is one…
Continue Reading
Previous323324325326327328329Next

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