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

Organization May Not Call Its Own 30(b)(6) Witness to Testify at Trial to Matters Outside His/Her Personal Knowledge

From Union Pump Co. v. Centrifugal Tech. Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25761 (5th Cir. Dec. 16, 2010): Federal Rule of Evidence 602 limits the scope of a witness's testimony to matters that are within his or her personal knowledge. Union Pump argues that Bixler [Union Pump’s 30(b)(6) deponent] was permitted to testify to matters that, alt ...
From Union Pump Co. v. Centrifugal Tech. Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25761 (5th Cir. Dec. 16, 2010): Federal Rule of Evidence 602 limits the scope of a witness’s testimony to matters that are within his or her personal knowledge.…
Continue Reading

RICO — If Plaintiff Does Not Rely on Mail Fraud Predicate, Third Party Reliance May Be Essential to Prove Causation

From UFCW Local 1776 v. Eli Lilly & Co., 620 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2010) (class certification decision): The putative class of TPPs [third-party payors] alleges that in the course of promoting off-label prescriptions of Zyprexa, Lilly engaged in mail and wire fraud by deliberately misrepresenting the drug's safety and efficacy. Plaintiffs c ...
From UFCW Local 1776 v. Eli Lilly & Co., 620 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2010) (class certification decision): The putative class of TPPs [third-party payors] alleges that in the course of promoting off-label prescriptions of Zyprexa, Lilly engaged in mail…
Continue Reading

Attorneys’ Fees under the Federal Arbitration Act for Prevailing over Unsuccessful Attack on Arbitration Award

From Western Tech. Servs. Int’l v. Cauchous Indus., S.A., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121269 (N.D. Tex. Nov. 16, 2010): Petitioner Western Technology Services International, Inc. ("Petitioner" or "Westech") filed its Notice of Application and Application to Confirm Arbitration Award on June 4, 2009. Westech and Respondent Cauchos Industriales ...
From Western Tech. Servs. Int’l v. Cauchous Indus., S.A., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121269 (N.D. Tex. Nov. 16, 2010): Petitioner Western Technology Services International, Inc. (“Petitioner” or “Westech”) filed its Notice of Application and Application to Confirm Arbitration Award on…
Continue Reading

Weak Position Not Frivolous Where Magistrate Judge Ordered Discovery on It and Appellate Judge Voted for Oral Argument — Forum Non Conveniens in Maritime Cases

From Vesuna v. CSCS Int’l N.V., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25531 (11th Cir. Dec. 13, 2010): Vesuna, a resident of India, sustained a serious back injury while working for Cruise Ship Catering Services ("CSCS") aboard a cruise ship owned by Costa Crociere ("Costa"). Vesuna's employment contract contained the following choice of law provision: ...
From Vesuna v. CSCS Int’l N.V., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25531 (11th Cir. Dec. 13, 2010): Vesuna, a resident of India, sustained a serious back injury while working for Cruise Ship Catering Services (“CSCS”) aboard a cruise ship owned by…
Continue Reading

Statutory Interpretation on Issues of First Impression — Three-Part Test

From Hamdi v. Napolitano, 620 F.3d 615 (6th Cir. 2010): The proper interpretation of the "on behalf of" language in § 1252(g) is a matter of first impression in this circuit (and apparently in all circuits). We review de novo such questions of statutory interpretation, United States v. Parrett, 530 F.3d 422, 429 (6th Cir. 2008 ...
From Hamdi v. Napolitano, 620 F.3d 615 (6th Cir. 2010): The proper interpretation of the “on behalf of” language in § 1252(g) is a matter of first impression in this circuit (and apparently in all circuits). We review de novo…
Continue Reading

Does Postjudgment Interest on an Attorneys’ Fee Award Run from the Date of the Merits Judgment or the Date of the Quantum Judgment? Circuit Split

From Fryer v. ASAP Fire & Safety Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132613 (D. Mass. Dec. 15, 2010): In pertinent part, section 1961 reads: Interest shall be allowed on any money judgment in a civil case recovered in a district court . . . Such interest shall be calculated from the date of the entry of the judgment, at ...
From Fryer v. ASAP Fire & Safety Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132613 (D. Mass. Dec. 15, 2010): In pertinent part, section 1961 reads: Interest shall be allowed on any money judgment in a civil case recovered in a district…
Continue Reading

“Arbitrability” vs. Scope of Arbitrators’ Authority — A Word in Use for 500 Years that Appears in Almost No Dictionaries

From Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Public Serv. Co. of Okla., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25252 (10th Cir. Dec. 10, 2010): As an initial matter, we must clarify the distinction between arbitrability and the scope of an arbitrator's authority, because different standards of review apply to each. An issue is arbitrable if it ...
From Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Public Serv. Co. of Okla., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25252 (10th Cir. Dec. 10, 2010): As an initial matter, we must clarify the distinction between arbitrability and the scope of an…
Continue Reading

Omitting/Misnaming Appellants Not Fatal to Appellate Jurisdiction, Notwithstanding Fed.R.App.P. 3(c), If Real-Parties-in-Interest Are Obvious and Involved

From SEC v. Wealth Mgmt. LLC, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24537 (7th Cir. Dec. 1, 2010): Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3 requires a notice of appeal to "specify the party or parties taking the appeal by naming each one in the caption or body of the notice." Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(A). Rule 3(c)'s specificity requirement exists to give "f ...
From SEC v. Wealth Mgmt. LLC, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24537 (7th Cir. Dec. 1, 2010): Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3 requires a notice of appeal to “specify the party or parties taking the appeal by naming each one…
Continue Reading

At-Issue Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege under Federal and New York Law

From Leviton Mfg. Co. v Greenberg Traurig LLP, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128849 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 2010): Under Second Circuit law, waiver of attorney-client privilege may occur, when a client testifies concerning portions of the attorney-client communication, . . . when a client places the attorney-client relationship ...
From Leviton Mfg. Co. v Greenberg Traurig LLP, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128849 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 2010): Under Second Circuit law, waiver of attorney-client privilege may occur, when a client testifies concerning portions of the attorney-client communication, . . .…
Continue Reading

In a Removed Diversity Case, May a District Court Sever a Non-Diverse Defendant Absent a Finding of Fraudulent Joiner or Misjoinder? Caselaw Split

From Cooke-Bates v. Bayer Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121255 (E.D. Va. Nov. 15, 2010) (on motion for certification under § 1292(b)): As a general matter, Rule 21 permits the Court to sever a party from a case in order to achieve complete diversity and establish proper jurisdiction of a civil action. Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Lar ...
From Cooke-Bates v. Bayer Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121255 (E.D. Va. Nov. 15, 2010) (on motion for certification under § 1292(b)): As a general matter, Rule 21 permits the Court to sever a party from a case in order…
Continue Reading
Previous361362363364365366367Next

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