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

RICO — Exercising Caution While Affording Liberal Construction

From U.S. Airline Pilots Ass’n, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 15781 (4th Cir. July 30, 2010): RICO, the federal claim at issue, "does not cover all instances of wrongdoing. Rather, it is a unique cause of action that is concerned with eradicating organized, long-term, habitual criminal activity." Gamboa v. Velez, 457 F.3d 703, 705 (7t ...
From U.S. Airline Pilots Ass’n, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 15781 (4th Cir. July 30, 2010): RICO, the federal claim at issue, “does not cover all instances of wrongdoing. Rather, it is a unique cause of action that is concerned with…
Continue Reading

No Subject Matter Waiver of Work Product Protection by SEC Due to DOJ’s Disclosure of SEC Notes in Criminal Prosecution

From Williams & Connolly LLP v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78570 (D.D.C. Aug. 4, 2010): FOIA Exemption 5 incorporates the work product doctrine, which shields "documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative (includi ...
From Williams & Connolly LLP v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78570 (D.D.C. Aug. 4, 2010): FOIA Exemption 5 incorporates the work product doctrine, which shields “documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of…
Continue Reading

Fed.R.App.P. 46 — “Conduct Unbecoming a Member of the Bar” — ABA Standards for Imposing Discipline — Recklessness (Good Quote)

From In re Girardi (Franco v. Dow Chem. Co.), 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14292 (9th Cir. July 13, 2010): "A member of the court's bar is subject to suspension or disbarment by the court if the member ... is guilty of conduct unbecoming a member of the court's bar." Fed. R. App. P. 46(b)(1)(B); see Gadda v. Ashcroft, 377 F.3d 934, 947 (9 ...
From In re Girardi (Franco v. Dow Chem. Co.), 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14292 (9th Cir. July 13, 2010): “A member of the court’s bar is subject to suspension or disbarment by the court if the member … is guilty…
Continue Reading

Who Becomes the Real-Party-in-Interest when a Party Becomes Incompetent? — Roles of State/Federal Law — Rules 17 and 25

From Kuelbs v. Hill, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 15757 (8th Cir. July 30, 2010): We first address who became the real party in interest after Kuelbs was declared incompetent. "In a diversity action, state law determines the issue of who is a real party in interest." Jaramillo v. Burkhart, 999 F.2d 1241, 1246 (8th Cir. 1993). W ...
From Kuelbs v. Hill, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 15757 (8th Cir. July 30, 2010): We first address who became the real party in interest after Kuelbs was declared incompetent. “In a diversity action, state law determines the issue of who…
Continue Reading

Fed.R.Civ.P. 83 Precludes Striking Brief on Ground It Lacks Tables of Contents and Authorities Required by Local Rule (Nonwillful Violation)

From Hanks v. Shinseki, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76660 (N.D. Tex. July 28, 2010): Hanks has moved to strike the defendants' motion, the brief in support thereof, and the appendix in support thereof. As to the defendants' motion and brief, Hanks contends that both should be stricken because the brief is longer than ten pages but does not in ...
From Hanks v. Shinseki, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76660 (N.D. Tex. July 28, 2010): Hanks has moved to strike the defendants’ motion, the brief in support thereof, and the appendix in support thereof. As to the defendants’ motion and brief,…
Continue Reading

Standards for Severing Claims into Separate Trials under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21

From Securities and Exchange Commission v. Leslie, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76826 (N.D. Cal. July 29, 2010): The "determination of a Rule 21(b) motion involves the sound discretion of the trial court . . . ." United States v. Testa, 548 F.2d 847, 856 (9th Cir. 1977). See also Rice v. Sunrise Express, Inc., 209 F.3d 1008, 101 ...
From Securities and Exchange Commission v. Leslie, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76826 (N.D. Cal. July 29, 2010): The “determination of a Rule 21(b) motion involves the sound discretion of the trial court . . . .” United States v. Testa,…
Continue Reading

New Article on 2010 Expert Witness Rule Amendments

Download associated file: 2010 Rules Amendment Article.pdf  Linked above is an article analyzing the 2010 Amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 affecting expert discovery and disclosure. These provisions were tweaked after the Advisory Committee received comm ...
Download associated file: 2010 Rules Amendment Article.pdf  Linked above is an article analyzing the 2010 Amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 affecting expert discovery and disclosure. These provisions were tweaked after the Advisory Committee received comments on…
Continue Reading

Speaking Objections at Deposition Sanctioned under Rule 30(d) — Excessive Number of Unnecessary Objections as Sanctionable Even If None Is Argumentative or Suggestive

From Craig v. St. Anthony’s Med. Ctr., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14661 (8th Cir. July 19, 2010): Once the deposition started, Harter continually made argumentative and suggestive objections. He also engaged in private and off-the-record conversations with his client, answered multiple questions in place of his client, and instructed his cli ...
From Craig v. St. Anthony’s Med. Ctr., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14661 (8th Cir. July 19, 2010): Once the deposition started, Harter continually made argumentative and suggestive objections. He also engaged in private and off-the-record conversations with his client, answered…
Continue Reading

Filing of Amended Complaint Does Not Permit Defendant to Amend Counterclaims as of Right to Add Claims Unrelated to the Amendment — 2009 Amendments to Rule 15 and Deletion of Rule 13(f) Explained — 3 Extra Days for Electronic Service

From UPEK, Inc. v. AuthenTec, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76807 (N.D. Cal. July 6, 2010): UPEK contends that AuthenTec's entitlement to amend its counterclaims as of right ended twenty-four days after UPEK filed its answer to the counterclaims. UPEK filed an amended complaint on the same day it answered AuthenTec's original counterclai ...
From UPEK, Inc. v. AuthenTec, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76807 (N.D. Cal. July 6, 2010): UPEK contends that AuthenTec’s entitlement to amend its counterclaims as of right ended twenty-four days after UPEK filed its answer to the counterclaims. UPEK…
Continue Reading

Admissibility of Blog Posts — Caselaw Split

From QVC, Inc. v. Your Vitamins, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76073 (D. Del. July 27, 2010): [Footnote 19] The court need not definitively determine, therefore, whether blog posts should be deemed relevant and credible evidence (generally and, in this context, as evidence of consumer confusion) — an issue of first impression for th ...
From QVC, Inc. v. Your Vitamins, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76073 (D. Del. July 27, 2010): [Footnote 19] The court need not definitively determine, therefore, whether blog posts should be deemed relevant and credible evidence (generally and, in this…
Continue Reading
Previous373374375376377378379Next

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