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

Issuer Is “Customer” of Underwriter for Purposes of Compelling FINRA Arbitration — Under FAA, Court Refusing to Enjoin Arbitration May Not Compel It in Another District

From JPMorgan Secs. Inc. v. La. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 712 F. Supp. 2d 70 (S.D.N.Y. 2010): JP Morgan and Bear Stearns ask this Court to grant a preliminary injunction enjoining its pending FINRA arbitration with Citizens. This Court's power to enjoin that arbitration derives from the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"). Section 2 of th ...
From JPMorgan Secs. Inc. v. La. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 712 F. Supp. 2d 70 (S.D.N.Y. 2010): JP Morgan and Bear Stearns ask this Court to grant a preliminary injunction enjoining its pending FINRA arbitration with Citizens. This Court’s power…
Continue Reading

Daubert — Strict Interpretation — Good Quotes — Criminal vs. Civil Daubert

From United States v. Hebshie, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120746 (D. Mass. Nov. 15, 2010): Daubert’s extra vigilance is essential for two reasons: First, while opinion testimony is generally excluded, expert witnesses are permitted to opine on the basis of evidence not given to the jury. See Fed. R. Evid. 703. Second, as I have prev ...
From United States v. Hebshie, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120746 (D. Mass. Nov. 15, 2010): Daubert’s extra vigilance is essential for two reasons: First, while opinion testimony is generally excluded, expert witnesses are permitted to opine on the basis of…
Continue Reading

Daubert — Liberal Interpretation — Good Quotes

From McClellan v. I-Flow Corp., 710 F. Supp. 2d 1092 (D. Or. 2010): Rule 702 permits expert testimony that is helpful to the trier of fact, reliable, and relevant. To that end, Daubert was intended to exclude "junk science" — unsupported testimony or evidence cloaked in the credentials of a testifying expert — that would confu ...
From McClellan v. I-Flow Corp., 710 F. Supp. 2d 1092 (D. Or. 2010): Rule 702 permits expert testimony that is helpful to the trier of fact, reliable, and relevant. To that end, Daubert was intended to exclude “junk science” —…
Continue Reading

Issuer Is Customer of Underwriter for Purposes of Compelling FINRA Arbitration — Under FAA, Court Refusing to Enjoin Arbitration May Not Compel It in Another District

From JPMorgan Secs. Inc. v. La. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 712 F. Supp. 2d 70 (S.D.N.Y. 2010): JP Morgan and Bear Stearns ask this Court to grant a preliminary injunction enjoining its pending FINRA arbitration with Citizens. This Court's power to enjoin that arbitration derives from the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"). Section 2 of th ...
From JPMorgan Secs. Inc. v. La. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 712 F. Supp. 2d 70 (S.D.N.Y. 2010): JP Morgan and Bear Stearns ask this Court to grant a preliminary injunction enjoining its pending FINRA arbitration with Citizens. This Court’s power…
Continue Reading

Federal Officer Removal — Requirements — Private Entity Whose Employees Are “Federal Officers” for Purposes of Removal May Not Itself Remove under §1442

From West v. A&S Helicopters, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120948 (W.D. Mo. Nov. 15, 2010): B. Federal Officer Removal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1442 The Federal Officer Removal Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1), allows removal to a federal forum of any civil or criminal action against "[t]he United States or any agency thereof or any officer ...
From West v. A&S Helicopters, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120948 (W.D. Mo. Nov. 15, 2010): B. Federal Officer Removal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1442 The Federal Officer Removal Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1), allows removal to a federal forum of…
Continue Reading

Shifting Burdens on Summary Judgment

From In re Oracle Corp. Secs. Litig., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 23531 (9th Cir. Nov. 16, 2010): We are mindful of the shifting burden of proof governing motions for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. The moving party initially bears the burden of proving the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp ...
From In re Oracle Corp. Secs. Litig., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 23531 (9th Cir. Nov. 16, 2010): We are mindful of the shifting burden of proof governing motions for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. The moving…
Continue Reading

Because a State Is Not a Citizen for Diversity Purposes, Its Presence as a Party Destroys Complete Diversity — Caselaw Split

From Hood v. AstraZeneca Pharm., LP, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107411 (N.D. Miss. Oct. 7, 2010): ***Congress has not empowered the federal courts to exercise diversity jurisdiction over the states. That is, it is beyond peradventure that "a State is not a 'citizen' for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction." Moor v. Alameda Cnty., ...
From Hood v. AstraZeneca Pharm., LP, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107411 (N.D. Miss. Oct. 7, 2010): ***Congress has not empowered the federal courts to exercise diversity jurisdiction over the states. That is, it is beyond peradventure that “a State is…
Continue Reading

Derivative Standing Requirements under RICO

From Morrell v. Alfortish, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119331 (E.D. La. Nov. 8, 2010): This case arises out of an alleged RICO enterprise operated by executives and board members of the Louisiana Horsemen's Benevolent & Protective Association 1993, Inc. ("LHBPA"). The LHBPA is a non-profit corporation empowered to represent the interests of rac ...
From Morrell v. Alfortish, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119331 (E.D. La. Nov. 8, 2010): This case arises out of an alleged RICO enterprise operated by executives and board members of the Louisiana Horsemen’s Benevolent & Protective Association 1993, Inc. (“LHBPA”).…
Continue Reading

Non-Lawyer Parent May Not Proceed Pro Se for Child, but Sole Beneficiary May Proceed Pro Se for Estate that Has No Creditors

From McCurdy v. Cambridge School Dist. No. 432, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119464 (D. Idaho Nov. 8, 2010): 2. Motion to Dismiss for Unauthorized Practice of Law Defendant argues that Mr. McCurdy is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by bringing claims on behalf of Mrs. McCurdy's Estate in a pro se capacity. This is a ...
From McCurdy v. Cambridge School Dist. No. 432, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119464 (D. Idaho Nov. 8, 2010): 2. Motion to Dismiss for Unauthorized Practice of Law Defendant argues that Mr. McCurdy is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law…
Continue Reading

Sanctions — Erroneous Position on Issue of First Impression, without More, Is Not Frivolous — Good Quote

From Komperda v. Hilton Hawaiian Village, LLC, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114079 (D. Hawaii Oct. 25, 2010) (state sanctions provision) : A litigant's "erroneous interpretation in a case of first impression should not, without more, lead the court to conclude that the plaintiff's claims are frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation." ...
From Komperda v. Hilton Hawaiian Village, LLC, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114079 (D. Hawaii Oct. 25, 2010) (state sanctions provision) : A litigant’s “erroneous interpretation in a case of first impression should not, without more, lead the court to conclude…
Continue Reading
Previous366367368369370371372Next

Recent Posts

RICO: Release Executed After Alleged RICO Violations Extinguishes RICO Claim — Eighth Circuit Declines to Address Enforceability of A Release “That Is An Integral Part of An Alleged RICO Scheme Or That Immunizes Future RICO Conduct

Pleading — “Civil pleadings are supposed to mark the boundaries for discovery; discovery is not supposed to substitute for definite pleading” (Good Quote) — Shotgun Pleadings (11th Circuit):  Four Categories/Types

Rule 37(c)(1) Exclusion of Untimely Expert Report: Failure to Argue Harmlessness Essentially Waives Issue

Rule 37(b) Sanctions — Exclusion of Supplemental Expert Report for Advancing New Opinions — Third Circuit Exclusion Factors — “Importance of Excluded Evidence:” If, As Proponent Argues, There Is Nothing New, Then Exclusion Doesn’t Harm Proponent; If There Is, It Harms Opponent

RICO Pleading: Generic Allegations of Fraud (Failing Even to Set Forth Any False Representation) And Extortion (Failing to Describe Actual Threats) Too Conclusory to State a Claim

RICO Standing: Antitrust’s Indirect Purchaser Rule Applies in RICO Cases, Barring Claims by Indirect Purchasers Two Or More Steps Removed From The Violator In A Distribution Chain (Here, Truck Purchasers/Lessees Suing Manufacturer), Though Court Considers Bar “Unsupported by Sensible Principles”

RICO Pleading: Statutory Directive That RICO Be Liberally Construed Does Not Extend to More Liberal Pleading Requirements

Inherent Power and FRAP 38 Sanctions — Inherent Power Sanctions (Here, A Deterrence Payment of $25,000 to the Court — Goodyear Issue Not Addressed) May Be Imposed in Addition to Statutory Attorney’s Fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 (Exceptional Patent Case) — § 285 Does Not Preclude A Separate Award of Sanctions Or Fees under Another Authority — Recidivism (25 Prior Lawsuits with Same Perceived Venue Deficiency) A Factor — Fact That Rule 11 Sanctions Were Unavailable Due to Dismissal of Lawsuit Opened the Door to Inherent Power Sanctions Under Chambers — FRAP 38 Sanctions Denied Because Issue Previously Unaddressed in Circuit — A Meritless Appeal Is By No Means Necessarily A Frivolous One (Good Quote)

FRAP 38 Sanctions Imposed Due to the “Striking Legal Emptiness” of Brief/Appeal, “A Legal Nothingburger” — Bad Faith Not Required: An Appeal “May Also Be Frivolous If It Is Filed Out Of Sheer Obstinacy” (Good Quotes)

RICO: Hobbs Act does not apply when the alleged extortion is meant to benefit the state

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