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

Party Collaboration with Expert OK — Expert Opinion Avoiding State of Mind — Contact with Ex-Employees of Party — Conduct Outside Limitations Period May Be Relevant — Admissions of Corporate Employees & Res Gestae

From Arista Records LLC v. Lime Group LLC, 715 F.Supp.2d 481 (S.D.N.Y. 2010): [T]here is no support for the contention that Dr. Waterman's study is flawed because of his collaboration with Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs assisted Dr. Waterman in a variety of ways, including obtaining the sample of files, categorizing the files in the sample, an ...
From Arista Records LLC v. Lime Group LLC, 715 F.Supp.2d 481 (S.D.N.Y. 2010): [T]here is no support for the contention that Dr. Waterman’s study is flawed because of his collaboration with Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs assisted Dr. Waterman in a variety of…
Continue Reading

Realleging Dismissed Claim without Curing Deficiency as Violating Improper-Purpose Clause of Rule 11

From Corrigan v. Dale, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 22149 (9th Cir. Oct. 19, 2010): The district court properly granted Hille's and Scudder's motion for Rule 11 sanctions because Corrigan's filing of successive complaints based on previously-rejected propositions of law constituted harassment. See Buster v. Greisen, 104 F.3d 1186, 1189-90 ...
From Corrigan v. Dale, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 22149 (9th Cir. Oct. 19, 2010): The district court properly granted Hille’s and Scudder’s motion for Rule 11 sanctions because Corrigan’s filing of successive complaints based on previously-rejected propositions of law constituted…
Continue Reading

Shotgun Complaint Fails to Satisfy Rule 8(a)(2) (Good Quote) — Repeated Failure to Cure Complaint = Dismissal with Prejudice — Limits on Liberal Construction of Pro Se Pleading — Carvel Fortune Melted Away

From Carvel v. Godley, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24763 (11th Cir. Dec. 2, 2010): Pamela Carvel, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's dismissal of her second amended complaint with prejudice and its order taxing costs. Carvel advances numerous claims against Betty Godley for depriving Carvel and her deceased aunt, Agnes Carv ...
From Carvel v. Godley, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24763 (11th Cir. Dec. 2, 2010): Pamela Carvel, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of her second amended complaint with prejudice and its order taxing costs. Carvel advances numerous claims…
Continue Reading

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
Previous362363364365366367368Next

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