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

District Court Lacks Inherent Power to Sanction Counsel for Conduct During Arbitration Even If Court Ordered the Parties to Arbitration (Note: Not Court-Annexed Arbitration)

The Court ordered the parties to arbitration pursuant to contract, on defendant’s motion, in Positive Software Solutions, Inc. v. New Century Mortgage Corp., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 19072 (5th Cir. Sept. 13, 2010): During arbitration, [Attorney] Camina advised [Defendant] New Century on various discovery matters. In September 2004, the dis ...
The Court ordered the parties to arbitration pursuant to contract, on defendant’s motion, in Positive Software Solutions, Inc. v. New Century Mortgage Corp., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 19072 (5th Cir. Sept. 13, 2010): During arbitration, [Attorney] Camina advised [Defendant] New…
Continue Reading

“No Actions” Clause Barring Suit and Requiring Indemnification of Defense Costs If Suit Is Filed Does Not Extend to Attorneys’ Fees Incurred in Bringing Counterclaim

From McKissick v. Gemstar-TV Guide Int’l, Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 18753 (10th Cir. Sept. 8, 2010): The *** "No Actions Clause" [provides]: 17. No Actions. Employee represents and warrants that she has not filed any complaints or charges or lawsuits against the Company with any governmental agency or any court, ...
From McKissick v. Gemstar-TV Guide Int’l, Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 18753 (10th Cir. Sept. 8, 2010): The *** “No Actions Clause” [provides]: 17. No Actions. Employee represents and warrants that she has not filed any complaints or charges or…
Continue Reading

Relaxed Timeliness Requirements for Rule 11 Motions under the PSLRA

From In re Star Gas Secs. Litig., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103475 (D. Conn. Sept. 30, 2010): Plaintiffs contend that Defendants' motion was untimely filed on April 3, 2007, because judgment entered against Plaintiffs on August 23, 2006. Although PSLRA Section 78u-4(c), which mandates that a court conduct a inquiry under Rule 11(b) "upon fina ...
From In re Star Gas Secs. Litig., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103475 (D. Conn. Sept. 30, 2010): Plaintiffs contend that Defendants’ motion was untimely filed on April 3, 2007, because judgment entered against Plaintiffs on August 23, 2006. Although PSLRA…
Continue Reading

May a Federal Court Enter Summary Judgment on an Issue That Is Less Than a Full “Claim”? — Caselaw Split as to Meaning of “Claim”

Hamblin v. British Airways PLC, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67401 (E.D.N.Y. June 15, 2010): Some courts have limited the availability of summary judgment motions to foreclosure of specific claims, not remedies. For example, in In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether Prods. Liab. Litig., 517 F. Supp. 2d 662, 666 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) ("MTBE"), ...
Hamblin v. British Airways PLC, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67401 (E.D.N.Y. June 15, 2010): Some courts have limited the availability of summary judgment motions to foreclosure of specific claims, not remedies. For example, in In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether…
Continue Reading

Prelitigation Email from Counsel Admissible against Client as Admission

From Cleveland Regional Med. Ctr., LP v. Celtic Props., L.C., 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 7942 (Tex. App. Sept. 30, 2010): In issue three, appellants assert that the trial court erred by improperly excluding an alleged admission by Celtic that the Master Lease was in "full force and effect." Specifically, appellants argue that the trial court er ...
From Cleveland Regional Med. Ctr., LP v. Celtic Props., L.C., 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 7942 (Tex. App. Sept. 30, 2010): In issue three, appellants assert that the trial court erred by improperly excluding an alleged admission by Celtic that the…
Continue Reading

RICO Has No Extraterritorial Reach

From Cedeño v. Intech Group, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88026 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 24, 2010): This civil action brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, seeks "damages arising out of a wide-ranging money laundering scheme that utilized New York-based U.S. banks to hold, move and ...
From Cedeño v. Intech Group, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88026 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 24, 2010): This civil action brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, seeks “damages arising out of a wide-ranging money…
Continue Reading

Only an Original Judgment That Is Registered Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1963 May be Re-Registered in Other Jurisdictions — A Judgment Created by Registration Cannot — Caselaw Split

From De Leon v. Marcos, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100644 (D. Colo. Sept. 23, 2010): The operative facts for purposes of the instant motion are undisputed. The Plaintiff is the named representative of a class that holds a judgment2 of almost $2 billion against former Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos. The judgment was entered on February ...
From De Leon v. Marcos, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100644 (D. Colo. Sept. 23, 2010): The operative facts for purposes of the instant motion are undisputed. The Plaintiff is the named representative of a class that holds a judgment2 of…
Continue Reading

Contractual Limitations Period Construed Strictly — Claim for Unearned Premium Is Not a Claim “under” Insurance Policy

From Archway Ins. Servs. v. James River Ins. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99708 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 21, 2010): The dispositive question is whether a claim for unearned premiums is a "claim under this policy" as specified in section 4(B). Although this question appears to be an issue of first impression in this Circuit, other courts have answere ...
From Archway Ins. Servs. v. James River Ins. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99708 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 21, 2010): The dispositive question is whether a claim for unearned premiums is a “claim under this policy” as specified in section 4(B).…
Continue Reading

Securities — Personal Jurisdiction for Control Group Claims — Fiduciary Shield Doctrine Inapt — Group Pleading Doctrine Not Viable under Private Securities Litigation Reform Act

From Snowstorm Acquisition Corp. v. Tecumseh Prods. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99259 (D. Del. Sept. 21, 2010): The standard for personal jurisdiction under § 20(a) is met if plaintiff makes a non-frivolous allegation that defendant controlled a person liable for securities fraud. 15 U.S.C. §§ 78t(a), 78aa. ...
From Snowstorm Acquisition Corp. v. Tecumseh Prods. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99259 (D. Del. Sept. 21, 2010): The standard for personal jurisdiction under § 20(a) is met if plaintiff makes a non-frivolous allegation that defendant controlled a person liable…
Continue Reading

Elements of the Torts of Spoliation under West Virginia Law

From Williams v. Great West. Cas. Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46247 (N.D. W.V. June 1, 2009): A. Negligent Spoliation ***To prevail on a claim for the tort of negligent spoliation by a third party under West Virginia law, a plaintiff must show that (1) a pending or potential civil action existed; (2) the alleged spoliator h ...
From Williams v. Great West. Cas. Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46247 (N.D. W.V. June 1, 2009): A. Negligent Spoliation ***To prevail on a claim for the tort of negligent spoliation by a third party under West Virginia law, a…
Continue Reading
Previous372373374375376377378Next

Recent Posts

(1) RICO Pattern: Open-Ended Continuity — The Vendetta Exception — Jury Could Reasonably Infer That Scheme Directed at One Person, With Goal of Destroying His Current and Future Business Prospects, Presented A Threat of Continued Racketeering Activity Extending Indefinitely into the Future — Lawsuit’s “Fortuitous Interruption” of Scheme ≠ Lack of Threat of Continuing Racketeering Activity — Acts of Concealment Used to Perpetuate Violations — Multiple Schemes Not Required — Jury Could Judge Defendant’s Credibility in Assessing Threat of Continuing Criminal Activity — (2) RICO Conspiracy — Two Methods of Proof: Agreement to Overall Objective Or to Commit Predicate Acts — Agreement Can Be Inferred from Conduct — Conspirator Needn’t Know All Details, Have Contact with Other Conspirators Or Participate in Every Stage

Experts: “Normally, Courts Are Loath to Outright Dismiss An Expert” (Good Quote) — Experts Are Unhelpful If They Misstate the Law [Note Premise That Testimony on Law Not Precluded Outright] — Rule 37 Sanctions Unwarranted for Unjustifiable Failure to Produce Relevant Document Already in Requester’s Possession

FRAP 38 Sanctions: (1) Pressing Objectively Frivolous Arguments, Multiple Misstatements at Oral Argument and Failure to Address What District Judge Said Warrant Award against Appellants’ Counsel (Only) — (2) “General Award” of $5,000 Warranted Where Appellee Failed to Sufficiently Document Its Fees and Expenses [Goodyear v. Haegar Issue]]

RICO: Capital Call Investment Process Increasing Equity of Those Responding to Call at Expense of Those Not Responding ≠ Collection of An Unlawful Debt

RICO [And Constitutional] Standing: Concrete Injury Requirement Not Satisfied by Alleged Intangible Injuries of Intrusion Upon Seclusion, Confusion And Emotional Distress, Public Disclosure of Private Facts, Deterred Speech On Nondefamatory Matters, Violation Of First Amendment Rights, And Compulsion

Rule 37(b) Sanctions: Striking of Answer, Default Judgment, Civil Contempt and Piercing Corporate Veil for Deliberate Disregard of Multiple Orders to Produce — Finding of Deliberate Disregard of Court Order Is Factual, Triggering Clear Error Review — Discretion Narrows When Default Sanction Involved — Fourth Circuit Factors for Rule 37 Default Sanction Are Different Than Those for Inherent Power Dismissal Sanction — Continued Defiance of Court Orders And Millions in Unpaid Judgments And Tax Liens Render Lesser Sanctions Futile

RICO: No Causation for Company Harmed by Governmental Customers Shunning It After Employee Publishes Book Admitting He Bribed Governmental Officials — Harm Too Indirect, Not from Bribery (Predicate Act) But from Customers’ Decisions to Shun and Publication of Book (Both Lawful) — Customers Injured by Bribery of Their Officials Are More Direct Plaintiffs

FRAP 38 Sanctions for Frivolous Opposition to Arbitration

Extrinsic Fraud Exception to Rooker-Feldman — Where Defendants’ Perjury, False Evidence, Flawed Legal Arguments Prevented Plaintiffs from Presenting Their Claim in State Court

Federal Jurisdiction: Party Can Waive Subject Matter Jurisdiction — While Federal Courts Must Ensure They Do Not Lack Subject Matter Jurisdiction, There Is No Duty to Find and Exercise It

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