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

Filing Federal Complaint Duplicating State Complaint Already Referred to Arbitration Sanctioned — Permissibility of Simultaneous State/Federal Actions in Other Circumstances Does Not Permit Refiling Adjudicated Action

Copeland v. Tom’s Foods, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1216 (7th Cir. Jan. 20, 2012): Thomas Ducey and his defunct law firm, Ducey & Associates, appeal from an order imposing sanctions for filing a complaint duplicating litigation that an Illinois court already had referred to arbitration. We affirm the judgment. *** In t ...
Copeland v. Tom’s Foods, Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1216 (7th Cir. Jan. 20, 2012): Thomas Ducey and his defunct law firm, Ducey & Associates, appeal from an order imposing sanctions for filing a complaint duplicating litigation that an Illinois…
Continue Reading

Securities — If Group Pleading Is Dead, Is Collective or Corporate Scienter Alive? Circuit Split

Rahman v. Kid Brands, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31406 (D.N.J. Mar. 8, 2012): In Winer Family Trust, the Third Circuit was asked to consider, inter alia, whether plaintiff former shareholders of Pennexx Foods could assert liability on the part of individual defendant directors and officers of Pennexx and Smithfield Foods on the basis of ...
Rahman v. Kid Brands, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31406 (D.N.J. Mar. 8, 2012): In Winer Family Trust, the Third Circuit was asked to consider, inter alia, whether plaintiff former shareholders of Pennexx Foods could assert liability on the part…
Continue Reading

Circuit Split: Is There a “Dangerous Patient” Exception to Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege? — 8th Circuit Says No — Statement to Emergency Room Admitting Physician’s Assistant Not Privileged — Elements of Privilege

United States v. Ghane, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 4990 (8th Cir. Mar. 9, 2012): In the normal course, "[w]e review the district court's admission of testimony for an abuse of discretion." United States v. Bad Wound, 203 F.3d 1072, 1075 (8th Cir. 2000). However, because this case encounters the delineation of a federal testimonial privile ...
United States v. Ghane, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 4990 (8th Cir. Mar. 9, 2012): In the normal course, “[w]e review the district court’s admission of testimony for an abuse of discretion.” United States v. Bad Wound, 203 F.3d 1072, 1075…
Continue Reading

May a District Court, in De Novo Review of a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, Consider New Evidence Not Proffered to the Magistrate Judge? Circuit Split

Muhammad v. Close, 798 F. Supp. 2d 869 (E.D. Mich. 2011) (reviewing summary judgment R&R): The Magistrate Judge Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636 et seq., requires a reviewing district court judge to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. A judge of ...
Muhammad v. Close, 798 F. Supp. 2d 869 (E.D. Mich. 2011) (reviewing summary judgment R&R): The Magistrate Judge Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636 et seq., requires a reviewing district court judge to “make a de novo determination of those portions…
Continue Reading

No Sanctions for Failure to Impose Litigation Hold and Consequent Destruction of Emails in IT Consolidation — No Bad Faith

Strutton v. Meade, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2117 (8th Cir. Feb. 3, 2012): Finally, we address Strutton's appeal of the district court's denial of sanctions against defendants. The district court retains an inherent power to impose sanctions, and we review the use of that authority for abuse of discretion. Stevenson v. Union Pac. RR. Co., 35 ...
Strutton v. Meade, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2117 (8th Cir. Feb. 3, 2012): Finally, we address Strutton’s appeal of the district court’s denial of sanctions against defendants. The district court retains an inherent power to impose sanctions, and we review…
Continue Reading

Injunctions — Circuit Split as to Whether Likelihood of Success Must Be Shown or Balancing Approach Retains Validity

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Warns, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26174 (D. Md. Feb. 29, 2012): The standard for awarding preliminary injunctive relief is governed by Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Counsel, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish (1) he is likely to succeed on the merits, (2) he is ...
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Warns, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26174 (D. Md. Feb. 29, 2012): The standard for awarding preliminary injunctive relief is governed by Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Counsel, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). A plaintiff seeking…
Continue Reading

RICO — Hobbs Act Predicate Requires Proof that Defendant Deprived Victim of Property Valuable in Defendants’ Hands — Circuit Split as to Whether Increasing Chances of Winning Contract by Destroying Competitor Suffices

United States v. Cain, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1772 (2d Cir. Jan. 31, 2012): On October 3, 2007, a federal grand jury in the Western District of New York returned a 21-count indictment charging David Cain, his brother Chris Cain, and their cousin Jamie Soha with participating in and conspiring to participate in the conduct of the affairs o ...
United States v. Cain, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1772 (2d Cir. Jan. 31, 2012): On October 3, 2007, a federal grand jury in the Western District of New York returned a 21-count indictment charging David Cain, his brother Chris Cain,…
Continue Reading

Outside of Civil Rights Cases, Request to Amend Complaint Must Be Accompanied by Proposed Amendment (Third Circuit)

Delrio-Mocci v. Connolly Properties Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3698 (3d Cir. Feb. 24, 2012): Bolmer also argues that the District Court abused its discretion by refusing to allow him to amend his complaint for a third time in order to plead additional facts that would demonstrate that the Property Managers prevented their undocumented r ...
Delrio-Mocci v. Connolly Properties Inc., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3698 (3d Cir. Feb. 24, 2012): Bolmer also argues that the District Court abused its discretion by refusing to allow him to amend his complaint for a third time in order…
Continue Reading

Denial of Summary Judgment Motion Not Appealable after Trial on the Merits

Turner v. Ramo, LLC, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3568 (11th Cir. Feb. 23, 2012): On appeal, the Ramo Company argues only that the district court erred in denying its pretrial motion for summary judgment. It is well-settled that we "will not review the pretrial denial of a motion for summary judgment after a full trial and judgment on the ...
Turner v. Ramo, LLC, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3568 (11th Cir. Feb. 23, 2012): On appeal, the Ramo Company argues only that the district court erred in denying its pretrial motion for summary judgment. It is well-settled that we “will…
Continue Reading

When Is Error Plain?

United States v. Laureys, 653 F.3d 27 (D.C. Cir. 2011): "Generally an error is plain if it contradicts circuit or Supreme Court precedent." In re Sealed Case, 573 F.3d 844, 851, 387 U.S. App. D.C. 375 (D.C. Cir. 2009). The district court's instructions contradicted no precedents of this Court or the Supreme Court. Rarely do we ...
United States v. Laureys, 653 F.3d 27 (D.C. Cir. 2011): “Generally an error is plain if it contradicts circuit or Supreme Court precedent.” In re Sealed Case, 573 F.3d 844, 851, 387 U.S. App. D.C. 375 (D.C. Cir. 2009). The…
Continue Reading
Previous327328329330331332333Next

Recent Posts

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

RICO: Cover-Up Within Limitations Period of Untimely RICO Violation “Was Merely A Continuation” Of The Original Injury And Could Not Be Used “As A ‘Bootstrap’ To Salvage [The] Time-Barred Claims–Declining to Apply Pinkerton Doctrine to Civil RICO Claims

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