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

Court Generally Should Stay Action on Granting Motion to Compel Arbitration, Not Dismiss It — Judicially-Created Exception If Arbitration Will Clearly Resolve All Issues

From Green v. SuperShuttle Int’l, Inc., 2011 WL 3890326 (8th Cir. Sept. 6, 2011): Mack Green and other current or former shuttle bus drivers at the Minneapolis–St. Paul International Airport (collectively Green) brought suit against SuperShuttle International, Inc., SuperShuttle Franchise Corporation, and SuperShuttle of Minnesota, ...
From Green v. SuperShuttle Int’l, Inc., 2011 WL 3890326 (8th Cir. Sept. 6, 2011): Mack Green and other current or former shuttle bus drivers at the Minneapolis–St. Paul International Airport (collectively Green) brought suit against SuperShuttle International, Inc., SuperShuttle Franchise…
Continue Reading

No Sanctions for Litigant’s False Sworn Statement of Fact Resulting from Mistake, Not Bad Faith

From McCreary v. Wertanen, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 27404 (6th Cir. Dec. 8, 2010): McCreary brought his complaint asserting violations of his constitutional rights against various employees of the Baraga Maximum Correctional Facility, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, and Baraga County Prosecutor Joseph O'Leary. Pursuant to Federal Rule o ...
From McCreary v. Wertanen, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 27404 (6th Cir. Dec. 8, 2010): McCreary brought his complaint asserting violations of his constitutional rights against various employees of the Baraga Maximum Correctional Facility, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, and Baraga…
Continue Reading

Textual Structure, Legislative History and the Absurdity Doctrine in Statutory Interpretation

Hall v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 223,2011 U.S. Claims LEXIS 1151 (Ct. Cl. June 21, 2011): Although statutory interpretation begins with the "plain text," a court turns to "the traditional tools of statutory construction, e.g., legislative history," if the intent and meaning of a statute are not clear from its plain text. Grapevine Imp ...
Hall v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 223,2011 U.S. Claims LEXIS 1151 (Ct. Cl. June 21, 2011): Although statutory interpretation begins with the “plain text,” a court turns to “the traditional tools of statutory construction, e.g., legislative history,” if the…
Continue Reading

To Satisfy Daubert and 702, Proponent of Expert Testimony Must Present Objective Validation of Methodology and Not Just Rely on Assurances from the Expert — Good Quotes

From Cason v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108534 (E.D. La. Sept. 21, 2011): When expert testimony is challenged under Daubert, the burden of proof rests with the party seeking to present the testimony. Moore v. Ashland Chem., Inc., 151 F.3d 269, 276 (5th Cir. 1998). To meet this burden, a party cannot simp ...
From Cason v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108534 (E.D. La. Sept. 21, 2011): When expert testimony is challenged under Daubert, the burden of proof rests with the party seeking to present the testimony.…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power Sanctions for Failing to Return Confidential Information as Required by Settlement Agreement and in Violation of Court Order — Jurisdiction to Sanction via Subpoena under Rule 45

Johnson v. Hankook Tire Mfg. Co., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 20868 (5th Cir. Oct. 13, 2011): This matter arises from an attorney's improper retention of confidential materials after settlement of a case in a Texas state court. The appellant, Wesley Todd Ball (Ball), represented various plaintiffs in a case which was settled with the ap ...
Johnson v. Hankook Tire Mfg. Co., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 20868 (5th Cir. Oct. 13, 2011): This matter arises from an attorney’s improper retention of confidential materials after settlement of a case in a Texas state court. The appellant, Wesley…
Continue Reading

Is Leave to Amend Complaint between Liability and Damages Phases of Bifurcated Trial Governed by Liberal Standard of Rule 15(a) or Tighter Standard of Rule 15(b)?

From SRI Int’l Inc. v. Internet Security Sys., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114178 (D. Del. Oct. 4, 2011): Symantec's motion presents what appears to be an issue of first impression: whether leave to amend between the liability and damages phases of a bifurcated patent trial is subject to the liberal standard set forth in Federal Rule ...
From SRI Int’l Inc. v. Internet Security Sys., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114178 (D. Del. Oct. 4, 2011): Symantec’s motion presents what appears to be an issue of first impression: whether leave to amend between the liability and damages…
Continue Reading

RICO — Competitors as Members of an Associated-in-Fact Enterprise

From Negrete v. Allianz Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118529 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2011): Allianz next contends that because each FMO competes "aggressively, and at cross-purposes" with every other FMO, plaintiffs are unable to prove the "common purpose" element required by Boyle. Specifically, Allianz argues that "'[i]f ...
From Negrete v. Allianz Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118529 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2011): Allianz next contends that because each FMO competes “aggressively, and at cross-purposes” with every other FMO, plaintiffs are unable to…
Continue Reading

Reliance on Internal Investigation as Affirmative Defense Effects Waiver Not Only of Report But Also Witness Interviews, Notes and Other Materials Protected by Privilege and Work Product

From Angelone v. Xerox Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109407 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 26, 2011): This Title VII employment discrimination action stems from plaintiff's employment with defendant Xerox. See Complaint (Docket # 1). Specifically, plaintiff alleges that she was discriminated against because of her gender, subjected to a continuing host ...
From Angelone v. Xerox Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109407 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 26, 2011): This Title VII employment discrimination action stems from plaintiff’s employment with defendant Xerox. See Complaint (Docket # 1). Specifically, plaintiff alleges that she was discriminated against…
Continue Reading

Contempt Sanctions for Violation of Protective Order — Giving Documents to Unauthorized Person with a Financial Incentive to Read Them = Contempt Notwithstanding Oral Direction Not to Read Them

From Hunt v. Enzo Biochem, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117607 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 11, 2011): Enzo Biochem, Inc., Heiman Gross, Barry Weiner, Elazar Rabbani, Sharim Rabbani, John Deluca, Dean Engelhardt, and John Does 1-50 (the "Enzo Defendants") bring this motion for sanctions against plaintiff Paul Lewicki and his former counsel, Dan Brecher ...
From Hunt v. Enzo Biochem, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117607 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 11, 2011): Enzo Biochem, Inc., Heiman Gross, Barry Weiner, Elazar Rabbani, Sharim Rabbani, John Deluca, Dean Engelhardt, and John Does 1-50 (the “Enzo Defendants”) bring this motion…
Continue Reading

Exceptions to Absolute Judicial Immunity from Suits for Money Damages Based on Judicial Acts

From Strand v. Dawson, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115367 (C.D. Utah Oct. 4, 2011): Judges are shielded with absolute immunity from suits for money damages based on their judicial action. [Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 9-10, 112 S. Ct. 286, 116 L. Ed. 2d 9 (1991); Forrester v. White, 484 U.S. 219, 225-26, 108 S. Ct. 538, 98 L. Ed. 2d 555 (198 ...
From Strand v. Dawson, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115367 (C.D. Utah Oct. 4, 2011): Judges are shielded with absolute immunity from suits for money damages based on their judicial action. [Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 9-10, 112 S. Ct.…
Continue Reading
Previous331332333334335336337Next

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