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

Alien Tort Claims Act Applies Only to Conduct Committed Abroad or with an “International Savor” — Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act Preempts ATCA Claim Based on Human

Trafficking in the U.S. From Velez v. Sanchez, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126586 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 30, 2010): Linda Velez ("Velez") claims that she was trafficked from Ecuador and forced to work in the home of Betsy Sanchez ("Betsy"). That single assertion spawned *** claims under the Alien Tort Statute ("ATS"), 28 U.S.C. § 1350, [and other s ...
Trafficking in the U.S. From Velez v. Sanchez, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126586 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 30, 2010): Linda Velez (“Velez”) claims that she was trafficked from Ecuador and forced to work in the home of Betsy Sanchez (“Betsy”). That single…
Continue Reading

Attorney-Client Privilege as Passing with Sale of Business, Even If Asset Sale

From Gilday v. Kenra, Ltd., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106310 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 4, 2010): Kenra, Ltd. *** purchased substantially all of Kenra, LLC's assets and continued Kenra, LLC's operations "at the exact same location using the same computer systems, file cabinets, documents and other assets . . . . Kenra hired all of the Kenra, LLC employe ...
From Gilday v. Kenra, Ltd., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106310 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 4, 2010): Kenra, Ltd. *** purchased substantially all of Kenra, LLC’s assets and continued Kenra, LLC’s operations “at the exact same location using the same computer systems,…
Continue Reading

Mistakenly Filing Documents under Seal, Rather than In Camera, for Privilege Review Is Not “Inadvertent” and Effects Waiver as to Those Documents but Not Subject Matter Waiver — Rule 502(b) vs. 502(a)

From First Am. CoreLogic, Inc. v. Fiserv, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127454 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2010): At the outset, before discussing CoreLogic's inadvertent disclosure argument, the Court briefly notes that if CoreLogic did not inadvertently disclose the documents, then the privilege was waived to those documents. In the present cas ...
From First Am. CoreLogic, Inc. v. Fiserv, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127454 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2010): At the outset, before discussing CoreLogic’s inadvertent disclosure argument, the Court briefly notes that if CoreLogic did not inadvertently disclose the documents,…
Continue Reading

Financial Condition of Parent Corporation Inadmissible on Issue of Punitive Damages Owed by Subsidiary

From St. Croix Renaissance Group, LLLP v. St. Croix Alumina, LLC, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122611 (D.V.I. Nov. 18, 2010): *** "It is a general principle of corporate law deeply ingrained in our economic and legal systems that a parent corporation ... is not liable for the acts of its subsidiaries." U.S. v. Bestfoods, 524 U.S. 51, 6 ...
From St. Croix Renaissance Group, LLLP v. St. Croix Alumina, LLC, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122611 (D.V.I. Nov. 18, 2010): *** “It is a general principle of corporate law deeply ingrained in our economic and legal systems that a parent…
Continue Reading

No Matter How Limited Its Jurisdiction, Court Possesses the Inherent Power to Strike a Filing from Its Docket

From Ready Transportation, Inc. v. Available Shippers, Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24431 (9th Cir. Oct. 6, 2010): Ready sued AAR and others***. All defendants except AAR were dismissed from the case in its early stages. Ready and AAR then settled their dispute under the terms of a confidential settlement agreement. They stipulated to dism ...
From Ready Transportation, Inc. v. Available Shippers, Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24431 (9th Cir. Oct. 6, 2010): Ready sued AAR and others***. All defendants except AAR were dismissed from the case in its early stages. Ready and AAR then…
Continue Reading

Insurance Coverage for Pre-Acquisition Liabilities Does Not Transfer by Operation of Law to Acquiror Who Assumes the Liabilities — Caselaw Split

From Keller Founds., Inc. v. Suncoast Post-Tension, LP, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 23838 (5th Cir. Nov. 19, 2010): Wausau *** challenges the *** holding that the policy covering Old Suncoast transferred by operation of law when the Keller Companies acquired the assets of Old Suncoast. The question of whether insurance coverage for pre-acquisit ...
From Keller Founds., Inc. v. Suncoast Post-Tension, LP, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 23838 (5th Cir. Nov. 19, 2010): Wausau *** challenges the *** holding that the policy covering Old Suncoast transferred by operation of law when the Keller Companies acquired…
Continue Reading

Legal Counting Conundra

From Nat’l Ass’n of Hom Builders v. OSHA, 602 F.3d 464 (D.C. Cir. 2010): A driver exceeding the speed limit runs a red light and swerves onto the opposite lane. Three violations of the law against reckless driving or one? Five punches to a victim's face without provocation. One battery or five? Same result if the punches were hou ...
From Nat’l Ass’n of Hom Builders v. OSHA, 602 F.3d 464 (D.C. Cir. 2010): A driver exceeding the speed limit runs a red light and swerves onto the opposite lane. Three violations of the law against reckless driving or one?…
Continue Reading

Arbitration Compelled against Non-Parties — Equitable Estoppel — Intertwining — Non-Parties Who Move to Compel Arbitration Ordered to Submit to It

From NS Holdings LLC v. Am. Int’l Group, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125077 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2010): Having found the arbitration provision to be enforceable, the Court must now address the provision's applicability to Defendants AIG and Chartis. The policy at issue in this case was entered into between Plaintiffs and Defendant AISLIC. D ...
From NS Holdings LLC v. Am. Int’l Group, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125077 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2010): Having found the arbitration provision to be enforceable, the Court must now address the provision’s applicability to Defendants AIG and Chartis. The…
Continue Reading

New Expert and Summary Judgment Rules Go into Effect December 1, 2010

On Wednesday, December 1, amended federal expert witness and summary judgment rules go into effect. The principal changes are to Rule 26: 1. Communications between counsel and retained experts are generally protected from disclosure or discovery. 2. Counsel must prepare disclosures summarizing the facts and opinions of experts ...
On Wednesday, December 1, amended federal expert witness and summary judgment rules go into effect. The principal changes are to Rule 26: 1. Communications between counsel and retained experts are generally protected from disclosure or discovery. 2. Counsel must prepare…
Continue Reading

Motions for Reconsideration — Standards (Seventh Circuit Articulation)

From Terry v. Woller, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122181 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 18, 2010): Motions to reconsider should only be presented when law or facts change significantly after an issue has been presented to the court, when the court has "patently misunderstood a party", when the court has made a decision outside the adversarial issues presente ...
From Terry v. Woller, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122181 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 18, 2010): Motions to reconsider should only be presented when law or facts change significantly after an issue has been presented to the court, when the court has…
Continue Reading
Previous361362363364365366367Next

Recent Posts

RICO: Indirect Purchasers (Car Buyers/Renters) Lack Standing to Sue Manufacturers for RICO Violations Even Though Intermediaries (Auto Dealer Direct Purchasers) Lack Any Damages

RICO: Statutory Requirement that RICO Be Liberally Construed Does Not Establish a More Liberal Pleading Standard for RICO Claims — “To Be Sure, Adequately Pleading a RICO Claim Can Be Challenging” (Good Quote) — Court May Dismiss Action Pursuant to Rule 41(b) Absent A Motion

Electronic Spoliation/Rule 37(e): (1) Finding of Recklessness But Neither Gross Negligence Nor Willfulness in Loss of Video Evidence Precludes Rule 37(e)(2)’s Severest Sanctions Because (i) No Intent to Deprive and (ii) Rule 37(e)(2) Displaces District Court’s Power to Invoke Inherent Power to Impose Those Sanctions — (2) Appellate Review = Abuse of Discretion, With The Caveat That Whether The District Court Applied The Correct Legal Standards Is Reviewed De Novo — (3) Inherent Power Is Often Available As An Alternate Source of Sanctioning Power But Can Be Limited by Rule or Statute, Something Which Courts Do Not Lightly Presume — (4) The Text of Rule 37(e)(2), As Confirmed by the Advisory Committee Note, Displaces Inherent Power to Impose the Sanctions Specified in the Rule or Any More Severe Sanctions — (5) “Intent to Deprive” in Rule 37(e)(2) = “The Willful Destruction Of Evidence With The Purpose Of Avoiding Its Discovery By An Adverse Party” — (6) Appellate Standing Conferred by Virtue of Issuance of Sanctions Regardless of Merits Outcome — (7) Value of Advisory Committee Notes in Interpreting Rules Enacted without Change Despite General Reticence to Rely on Legislative History

RICO: (1) Plaintiff Need Not Suffer Injury from Each Predicate Act to Establish Standing, And The Pattern May Include Predicates As to Which No Plaintiff Has Standing — (2) 7 Elements of a Civil RICO Claim (2d Circuit Articulation) Which Must Be Established As to Each Defendant — (3) Requirements of an Association-in-Fact Enterprise — (4) Each Defendant Must Personally Commit 2 or More Predicate Acts — (5) Pattern of Racketeering Activity: Horizontal and Vertical Elements — (6) No Requirement That All Members of a RICO Enterprise Joined at Inception — Can Join Over Time/Others Can Quit — (7) Cannot Charge 2 Predicate Acts Where One Action Violates Two Statutes — (8) A Footnote to Consider for Briefs: “Unless Otherwise Noted, When Quoting Judicial Decisions This Order Accepts All Alterations And Omits All Citations, Footnotes, And Internal Quotation Marks.”

For An Appeal to Be Timely, A Motion for Reconsideration in The District Court (A Rule 59(e) Motion) Must Be Filed, And Not Just Served within 30 Days of The Decision, to Toll The 30-Day Period for Filing An Appeal

There Is No Good-Faith Defense For Issuing An Overly Burdensome Subpoena

Purposes of Rule 37 and Section 1927 Sanctions

While Rule 11 Doesn’t Apply to Appellate Proceedings (Unless It Has Been Incorporated in Local Appellate Rules), Rule 11 Caselaw Is Looked to for Guidance in Interpreting Applicable Sanctions Powers on Appeal

Rule 11 Sanctions & Appellate Review: Abuse of Discretion Standard Applies Unless Sanctions Are Based Solely (Not Just in Part) on Legal Issues, in Which Case Review Is De Novo

Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions for Altering Expert’s 26(a)(2)(B) Report — Without the Expert’s Knowledge or Approval — by Converting It from PDF to Word, Changing Headings and Other Formatting, and Omitting a Page of Relevant Text and Appendices, Even Though Expert Testified That The Overall Substance of the Report Was Unchanged — Rule 37(b)(2)(A) Sanctions May Be Reversed If Failure to Comply with Discovery Order Was Due to Misunderstanding or Inability to Comply

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