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

Intervenor Who Satisfies Rule 24(a)(2) Need Not Also Show Article III Standing in Order to Intervene as of Right — Circuit Split

NAACP, Inc. v. Dulin County, N.C., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12513 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 3, 2012): Rule 24(a)(2) governs intervention by right, and states as follows, On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who . . . claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the actio ...
NAACP, Inc. v. Dulin County, N.C., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12513 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 3, 2012): Rule 24(a)(2) governs intervention by right, and states as follows, On timely motion, the court must permit anyone to intervene who . . . claims…
Continue Reading

No Sanctions for Local Counsel Who Was Uninvolved in Drafting Complaint or Devising Litigation Strategy

Gallop v. Cheney, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2154 (2d Cir. Feb. 2, 2012): In an order dated October 14, 2011, Gallop v. Cheney, 660 F.3d 580 (2d Cir. 2011) ("Gallop III"), this Court imposed sanctions on counsel of record to plaintiff-appellant April Gallop -- Dennis Cunningham, Mustapha Ndanusa, and William W. Veale --f or filing a frivolous ...
Gallop v. Cheney, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2154 (2d Cir. Feb. 2, 2012): In an order dated October 14, 2011, Gallop v. Cheney, 660 F.3d 580 (2d Cir. 2011) (“Gallop III”), this Court imposed sanctions on counsel of record to…
Continue Reading

Party’s Motion for a Stay Pending a Decision in Another Case to Which It Is Not a Party Is a Motion for an Indefinite Stay — Standards for Indefinite Stay

Red River Coal Co. v. United States, 2012 U.S. Claims LEXIS 32 (Fed. Cl. Jan. 31, 2012): When determining whether to issue an indefinite stay, the Court must (1) "identify a pressing need for the stay" and (2) "balance interests favoring a stay against interests frustrated by the action." Cherokee Nation of Okla., 124 F.3d at 1 ...
Red River Coal Co. v. United States, 2012 U.S. Claims LEXIS 32 (Fed. Cl. Jan. 31, 2012): When determining whether to issue an indefinite stay, the Court must (1) “identify a pressing need for the stay” and (2) “balance interests…
Continue Reading

Mere Testimony or Interrogatory Answer that Party Relied on Advice of Counsel Does Not Waive Privilege as Long as No Affirmative Defense of Advice of Counsel Is Asserted

BancInsure, Inc. v. Peoples Bank of the South, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5326 (S.D. Miss. Jan. 18, 2012): Peoples Bank does not contest specific documents identified on the privilege log. Rather, it makes a blanket argument that the attorney-client privilege is waived for all withheld documents based BancInsure's assertion of reliance on ad ...
BancInsure, Inc. v. Peoples Bank of the South, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5326 (S.D. Miss. Jan. 18, 2012): Peoples Bank does not contest specific documents identified on the privilege log. Rather, it makes a blanket argument that the attorney-client privilege…
Continue Reading

Updated Article on Internet & Email Evidence (Part 1)

An updated version of Internet and Email Evidence (with additional focus on social media), as published this month in The Practical Litigator, is available here. Part 2 will be published in April. Reprinted with permission ...
An updated version of Internet and Email Evidence (with additional focus on social media), as published this month in The Practical Litigator, is available here. Part 2 will be published in April. Reprinted with permission. Subsequent note: Part 2…
Continue Reading

No Rule 11 Sanctions for Conduct in State Court — Injunction Void under Rule 65(d) for Vagueness and for Proscribing Lawful Acts

Blanco River, LLC v. Green, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 378 (5th Cir. Jan. 6, 2012): Blanco River, L.L.C., a real estate investment vehicle, is a limited liability Arizona corporation that sought to purchase and develop land bordering the Blanco River in Texas. Green was the manager of this venture, which failed. Blanco River sued Green, alleg ...
Blanco River, LLC v. Green, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 378 (5th Cir. Jan. 6, 2012): Blanco River, L.L.C., a real estate investment vehicle, is a limited liability Arizona corporation that sought to purchase and develop land bordering the Blanco River…
Continue Reading

Arbitration — Second Circuit Sets High Threshold to Overturn Award on Grounds of “Evident Partiality” — Adopts Fourth Circuit Standards — Non-Disclosure Rarely Sufficient

Scandinavian Reins. Co. v. St. Paul F&M Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2082 (2d Cir. Feb. 3, 2012): The primary question presented on this appeal is whether the failure of two arbitrators to disclose their concurrent service as arbitrators in another, arguably similar, arbitration constitutes "evident partiality" within the meaning ...
Scandinavian Reins. Co. v. St. Paul F&M Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2082 (2d Cir. Feb. 3, 2012): The primary question presented on this appeal is whether the failure of two arbitrators to disclose their concurrent service as arbitrators…
Continue Reading

RICO — Horizontal and Vertical Relatedness

United States v. Cain, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1772 (2d Cir. Jan. 31, 2012): The substantive RICO provision under which the defendants were convicted makes it unlawful for "any person employed by or associated with any enterprise . . . to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a ...
United States v. Cain, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 1772 (2d Cir. Jan. 31, 2012): The substantive RICO provision under which the defendants were convicted makes it unlawful for “any person employed by or associated with any enterprise . . .…
Continue Reading

Standards for Deposing Opposing Counsel — Claim for Attorney’s Fees Does Not Open Door to Deposition

United States Liab. Ins. Co. v. Goldin Metals, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4881 (S.D. Miss. Jan. 17, 2011): The Goldins are defendants in a related civil suit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. *** The Goldins tendered defense of the NCI lawsuit to Plaintiff, United States Liability Insurance ...
United States Liab. Ins. Co. v. Goldin Metals, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4881 (S.D. Miss. Jan. 17, 2011): The Goldins are defendants in a related civil suit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of…
Continue Reading

Impact of Daubert at Class Certification — Conflicting Circuit Views

Third Circuit: “[The district court] need not turn class certification into a mini-trial.... We understand the Court’s observation [i.e., the Supreme Court’s observation in Dukes] to require a district court to evaluate whether an expert is presenting a model which could evolve to become admissible evidence, and ...
Third Circuit: “[The district court] need not turn class certification into a mini-trial…. We understand the Court’s observation [i.e., the Supreme Court’s observation in Dukes] to require a district court to evaluate whether an expert is presenting a model which…
Continue Reading
Previous330331332333334335336Next

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

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