Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Complex Lit Blog

From Bank of New York v. Bell, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3850 (D. Conn. Jan. 14, 2011): The standard for granting motions for reconsideration is strict; motions for reconsideration "will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court overlooked — matters, in other words, that might ...
From Bank of New York v. Bell, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3850 (D. Conn. Jan. 14, 2011): The standard for granting motions for reconsideration is strict; motions for reconsideration “will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to…
From Dedon GmbH and Dedon Inc. v. Janus et Cie, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 262 (2d Cir. Jan. 6, 2011): A. Dispute Involving the Existence of the Contract *** The Supreme Court recently reiterated that "[a]rbitration is strictly a matter of consent and thus 'is a way to resolve those disputes--but only those disputes--that the ...
From Dedon GmbH and Dedon Inc. v. Janus et Cie, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 262 (2d Cir. Jan. 6, 2011): A. Dispute Involving the Existence of the Contract *** The Supreme Court recently reiterated that “[a]rbitration is strictly a matter…
From Edmons v. Home Depot, USA, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3811 (D. Or. Jan. 14, 2011): [T]here is a presumption that where an expert's report is prepared for litigation, "the party proffering it must come forward with other objective, verifiable evidence that the testimony is based on 'scientifically valid principles.'" [Daubert v. ...
From Edmons v. Home Depot, USA, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3811 (D. Or. Jan. 14, 2011): [T]here is a presumption that where an expert’s report is prepared for litigation, “the party proffering it must come forward with other objective,…
From State v. Poling, 160 Ohio Misc. 2d 84, 2010 Ohio 542,; 2010 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 408 (Municipal Cort, Hocking County 2010): The defendant is charged with a count of violating a *** civil protection order that was obtained in the Common Pleas Court of Hocking County by Jana Kaiser. The order prohibited the defendant from having contact wi ...
From State v. Poling, 160 Ohio Misc. 2d 84, 2010 Ohio 542,; 2010 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 408 (Municipal Cort, Hocking County 2010): The defendant is charged with a count of violating a *** civil protection order that was obtained in…
From WWP, Inc. v. Wounded Warriors Family Support, Inc., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 579 (8th Cir. Jan. 12, 2011): In a motion in limine, WWFS asked the district court to bar Kirchner from testifying at trial. WWFS argued Kirchner's testimony did "not meet the helpful requirement of Fed. R. Evid. 702 and Daubert [v. Merrell Dow Pharms ...
From WWP, Inc. v. Wounded Warriors Family Support, Inc., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 579 (8th Cir. Jan. 12, 2011): In a motion in limine, WWFS asked the district court to bar Kirchner from testifying at trial. WWFS argued Kirchner’s testimony…
From Alexander v. Del Monte Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139465 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 11, 2011): An adverse inference instruction is appropriate where a party knew that the evidence was relevant to some issue at trial and his culpable conduct resulted in its destruction. Beaven v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 622 F.3d 540, 553 (6th Cir. 201 ...
From Alexander v. Del Monte Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139465 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 11, 2011): An adverse inference instruction is appropriate where a party knew that the evidence was relevant to some issue at trial and his culpable conduct…
From Owensby v. Estate of Phillips, 2010 N.C. App. LEXIS 2302 (N.C. App. Dec. 7, 2010) (decided under the North Carolina equivalent of Fed.R.Civ.P. 11): The Supreme Court has adopted a "two-part analysis" for use in determining the legal sufficiency of a complaint, under which the trial court "looks first to the facial plausibility of th ...
From Owensby v. Estate of Phillips, 2010 N.C. App. LEXIS 2302 (N.C. App. Dec. 7, 2010) (decided under the North Carolina equivalent of Fed.R.Civ.P. 11): The Supreme Court has adopted a “two-part analysis” for use in determining the legal sufficiency…
From Prince v. Berg, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1071 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2011): This shareholders derivative action was filed in San Mateo Superior Court and was removed here by defendants, based on their contention that the claims arise under federal law. The complaint alleges that nominal defendant Oracle Corporation engaged in a scheme ove ...
From Prince v. Berg, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1071 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2011): This shareholders derivative action was filed in San Mateo Superior Court and was removed here by defendants, based on their contention that the claims arise under…
From Cranpark, Inc., v. Rogers Group, Inc., 721 F. Supp. 2d 613 (N.D. Ohio 2010): The case at bar appears to offer an issue of first impression: when a contract involves the sale of goods, as well as a real estate term, and the goods have no prior relationship to the real estate (e.g., as a fixture, as a mineral, or as a crop) d ...
From Cranpark, Inc., v. Rogers Group, Inc., 721 F. Supp. 2d 613 (N.D. Ohio 2010): The case at bar appears to offer an issue of first impression: when a contract involves the sale of goods, as well as a real…

Recent Posts

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)

Archives