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

Bank Owes No Duty of Care to Non-Customers, Including No Duty to Detect Fraudulent Conduct of Its Customers

From Public Serv. Co. of Okla. v. A Plus, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85179 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 2, 2011): PSO brought this action to recover sums it paid to A Plus, Inc. a/k/a Jarvis Furniture a/k/a A Plus Spraying (collectively, "A Plus") pursuant to invoices submitted to PSO by A Plus and/or its owners, defendants Randel R. Stone and Kimb ...
From Public Serv. Co. of Okla. v. A Plus, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85179 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 2, 2011): PSO brought this action to recover sums it paid to A Plus, Inc. a/k/a Jarvis Furniture a/k/a A Plus Spraying…
Continue Reading

Standards of Admissibility for Expert Testimony as to Ultimate Issue, Credibility Determinations and State of Mind

From Quagliarello v. Dewees, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78870 (E.D. Pa. July 20, 2011) (§ 1983 action against a police officer): Plaintiff's police expert Walter Signorelli ("Signorelli") filed reports in this case on July 31, 2010.... Defendants move to preclude Signorelli from testifying to or otherwise presenting evidence of opinions tha ...
From Quagliarello v. Dewees, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78870 (E.D. Pa. July 20, 2011) (§ 1983 action against a police officer): Plaintiff’s police expert Walter Signorelli (“Signorelli”) filed reports in this case on July 31, 2010…. Defendants move to preclude…
Continue Reading

Verified Pleadings Satisfy Evidentiary Standard of Rule 56, Particularly in Pro Se Cases

From Herrington v. Spruill, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122700 (S.D. Fla. June 5, 2008): Herrington's Response (DE# 46) and Statement of Facts (DE# 47) are not in affidavit form, and are not themselves sworn under penalty of perjury. Relevant facts stated in Herrington's Response, however, are also stated by him in his sworn Amendment to the c ...
From Herrington v. Spruill, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122700 (S.D. Fla. June 5, 2008): Herrington’s Response (DE# 46) and Statement of Facts (DE# 47) are not in affidavit form, and are not themselves sworn under penalty of perjury. Relevant facts…
Continue Reading

Production of Email in Discovery Authenticates the Email

Bruno v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59795 (W.D. Pa. June 3, 2011): Plaintiff argues that the series of emails between Ms. Menster and Mr. Thomas have not been properly au-thenticated. *** "A party to litigation that produces documents during discovery in that litigation thereby authenticates the documents it has produced." ...
Bruno v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59795 (W.D. Pa. June 3, 2011): Plaintiff argues that the series of emails between Ms. Menster and Mr. Thomas have not been properly au-thenticated. *** “A party to litigation that produces…
Continue Reading

Self-Authentication and Judicial Notice of Government Website Postings

From Scurmont LLC v. Firehouse Restaurant Grp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75715 (D. S.C. July 8, 2011): Records from government websites are generally considered admissible and self-authenticating. Courts have also taken judicial notice, pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 201, of information taken from government and media websites. See generally R ...
From Scurmont LLC v. Firehouse Restaurant Grp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75715 (D. S.C. July 8, 2011): Records from government websites are generally considered admissible and self-authenticating. Courts have also taken judicial notice, pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 201, of…
Continue Reading

Delaware Supreme Court Affirms Enhanced Burden of Proof, Corroboration Requirement and $3.2 Million Award as Sanctions for Wiping Unallocated Space, Deleting Traces of Spoliation and Destroying Electronic Documents

From Genger v. TR Inves., LLC, 2011 Del. LEXIS 371 (Del. Sup. Ct. July 18, 2011): Two weeks after the entry of the stipulated final judgment, the Trump Group moved for relief from that judgment and to re-open the Section 225 proceeding. The Trump Group claimed that, after taking control of Trans-Resources, they discovered that Genger ha ...
From Genger v. TR Inves., LLC, 2011 Del. LEXIS 371 (Del. Sup. Ct. July 18, 2011): Two weeks after the entry of the stipulated final judgment, the Trump Group moved for relief from that judgment and to re-open the Section…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — That Others Have Filed Similar Lawsuits that Have Not Been Dismissed, If Anything, Militates against a Finding of Improper Purpose — Mere Fact that Plaintiff Has Filed Other Lawsuits Insufficient to Sustain § 1927 Sanctions

From Beecher v. Riverdale Riding Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86654 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 3, 2011): Beecher commenced this action on July 2, 2008 and amended her complaint on September 3, 2008. The allegations in Beecher's amended complaint concern the operation of the River Ridge Equestrian Center ("River Ridge"), a riding facility operated by d ...
From Beecher v. Riverdale Riding Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86654 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 3, 2011): Beecher commenced this action on July 2, 2008 and amended her complaint on September 3, 2008. The allegations in Beecher’s amended complaint concern the operation…
Continue Reading

Generally No Hearsay — as Opposed to Authentication — Problem Associated with Images Posted on Internet

From United States v. Cameron, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4721 (D. Me. Jan. 18, 2011): [T]he images [found on the ISP server] are not hearsay to begin with.... The rule against the admission of hearsay applies to only to statements offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Fed. R. Evid. 801(c); Fed. R. Evid. 802. A “statement” i ...
From United States v. Cameron, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4721 (D. Me. Jan. 18, 2011): [T]he images [found on the ISP server] are not hearsay to begin with…. The rule against the admission of hearsay applies to only to statements…
Continue Reading

Standards for Disqualification of Opposing Counsel Who Served as Mediator in Earlier Dispute between Parties

From Hossaini v. Vaelizadeh, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86436 (D. Neb. Aug. 4, 2011): Relatively few courts have considered the disqualification of an attorney who has previously served as a mediator for a dispute between the parties. The most thorough discussion comes in the case of Poly Software International, Inc. v. Datamost Corpora ...
From Hossaini v. Vaelizadeh, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86436 (D. Neb. Aug. 4, 2011): Relatively few courts have considered the disqualification of an attorney who has previously served as a mediator for a dispute between the parties. The most thorough…
Continue Reading

Arbitration — Determining the Amount in Controversy for Purposes of Confirming an Award — Amount Claimed vs. Amount Awarded

From Smith v. Tele-Town Hall, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76669 (E.D. Va. July 15, 2011): This case presents the question, unresolved in this circuit, whether the jurisdictionally required amount in controversy with respect to a motion to confirm an arbitration award should be based solely on the original amount claimed in the arbitration ...
From Smith v. Tele-Town Hall, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76669 (E.D. Va. July 15, 2011): This case presents the question, unresolved in this circuit, whether the jurisdictionally required amount in controversy with respect to a motion to confirm an…
Continue Reading
Previous347348349350351352353Next

Recent Posts

§ 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

Inherent Power — Circumstantial Evidence — Fact That Bad Faith May Be Shown by Establishing That Conduct Was So Egregious It Was Necessarily Committed in Bad Faith Does Not Mean That Bad Faith Must Be The Sole Explanation for The Bad Conduct

RICO Causation: Testing Labs’ Misstatements As to Alcohol Tests’ Efficacy Not Communicated to Plaintiffs’ Employers Did Not Cause Plaintiffs’ Professional Harm

Supreme Court: Standing — When The Government Prohibits Or Impedes Company A from Using Company B’s Product, Both Are Objects of the Government’s Action And Have Standing to Contest It — “To Demonstrate Standing, Plaintiffs Must Answer A Basic Question—‘What’s It To You?’” (Good Quote) — Expert Evidence Not Required to Establish Standing — “Judges Are Not Required To Exhibit A Naiveté From Which Ordinary Citizens Are Free’” (Good Quote)

Rule 37(d) Sanctions — For Failure to Serve Answers, Objections, Or Written Response to Discovery Requests — Are Not Limited to Intentional Misconduct; Even Innocent Mistakes May Be Covered

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