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

Ability to Pay and Safe Harbor Irrelevant to § 1927 Sanctions — Facial Unconstitutionality of § 1927 Waived when Not Asserted in Challenge to Sanctionability of Conduct — Circuit Panel Bound by Prior Panel Precedent

From Roth v. Spruell, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 15112 (10th Cir. July 22, 2010): [On a prior appeal in this case abbreviated Roth II], we considered whether defendants had followed the procedures outlined in Rule 11. Because defendants had not done so, we concluded that the district court had abused its discretion in granting defend ...
From Roth v. Spruell, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 15112 (10th Cir. July 22, 2010): [On a prior appeal in this case abbreviated Roth II], we considered whether defendants had followed the procedures outlined in Rule 11. Because defendants had not…
Continue Reading

RICO — Open-Ended Continuity — Predicate Acts, Not Other Conduct, Must Form the Enterprise’s Regular Way of Doing Business

From Carson v. Vernon Township, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73620 (D.N.J. July 21, 2010): Plaintiff, Richard Carson, a member of the Township Council ("Council") of Defendant, Vernon Township ("Township"), filed a Complaint and subsequently an Amended Complaint against the Defendants, who include the Township, its Police Department, a police of ...
From Carson v. Vernon Township, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73620 (D.N.J. July 21, 2010): Plaintiff, Richard Carson, a member of the Township Council (“Council”) of Defendant, Vernon Township (“Township”), filed a Complaint and subsequently an Amended Complaint against the Defendants,…
Continue Reading

Parameters of Adverse Counsel’s Contacting Former Employees of Corporate Party — Substantial Exposure to Privileged Communications or Service as Litigation Consultant as Touchstone

From Weber v. Fujifilm Med. Sys., USA, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72416 (D. Conn. July 19, 2010): In an exhaustive decision on this issue, then District Judge Jose A. Cabranes held, in a case of first impression, that an attorney representing a client against a corporate party may conduct ex parte interviews of former employees of the corporat ...
From Weber v. Fujifilm Med. Sys., USA, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72416 (D. Conn. July 19, 2010): In an exhaustive decision on this issue, then District Judge Jose A. Cabranes held, in a case of first impression, that an attorney…
Continue Reading

“Plain Error” — Absence of Intracircuit Authority and Circuit Split on Issue Render Alleged Error Anything But Plain

From United States v. Williams, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14852 (3d Cir. July 20, 2010): As noted earlier, we review the District Court's decision under the plain error standard. Thus, assuming that Williams is correct that the sentence imposed by the District Court exceeded the maximum prison term authorized by the supervised release statute ...
From United States v. Williams, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14852 (3d Cir. July 20, 2010): As noted earlier, we review the District Court’s decision under the plain error standard. Thus, assuming that Williams is correct that the sentence imposed by…
Continue Reading

RICO — Theft Coupled with Continuous Use of Stolen Property ≠ Pattern

From Spindletop Drilling Co. v. Lewis, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70889 (W.D. Ark. July 14, 2010): Spindletop alleges that, after refusing to sell certain storage tanks to Lewis, Lewis and/or Lewis Louisiana Properties removed four storage tanks from Spindletop's well in Clairborne Parish, Louisiana (the Waller-Taylor Well) and transported th ...
From Spindletop Drilling Co. v. Lewis, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70889 (W.D. Ark. July 14, 2010): Spindletop alleges that, after refusing to sell certain storage tanks to Lewis, Lewis and/or Lewis Louisiana Properties removed four storage tanks from Spindletop’s well…
Continue Reading

Motions to Strike Impertinent, Immaterial or Scandalous Matters — Standards

From Smith v. Levine Leichtman Capital Partners, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71041 (N.D. Cal. June 29, 2010): "The court may order stricken from any pleading any insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous material." Fed. R. Civ. P. (12)(f). Immaterial matter "is that which has no essential or important re ...
From Smith v. Levine Leichtman Capital Partners, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71041 (N.D. Cal. June 29, 2010): “The court may order stricken from any pleading any insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous material.” Fed. R. Civ. P.…
Continue Reading

Removal — Circuit Split — Each Co-Defendant Need Not Sign Removal Notice or Submit a Timely Notice of Consent in Writing (District Court in Undecided 10th Circuit) — Silence vs. Ambiguity of Statute (Good Quote)

From Tresco, Inc. v. Continental Cas. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71294 (D.N.M. July 2, 2010): The Tenth Circuit***has not stated what is necessary to satisfy the requirement that all defendants "join in the removal petition." *** The United States Courts of Appeals for the Fifth, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits, and some district cour ...
From Tresco, Inc. v. Continental Cas. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71294 (D.N.M. July 2, 2010): The Tenth Circuit***has not stated what is necessary to satisfy the requirement that all defendants “join in the removal petition.” *** The United States…
Continue Reading

Motion and Counterclaim Filed at Eleventh Hour Stricken as Filed in Bad Faith — Inherent Power Sanction

From Strategic Turnaround Equity Partners, LP (Cayman) v. Fife, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63629 (E.D. Mich. June 28, 2010): In this corporate dispute, Plaintiff Strategic Turnaround Equity Partners, L.P. ("Strategic") claims that Defendants United American Healthcare Corporation ("UAHC"), Thomas Goss, St. George Investments, LLC ("St. George ...
From Strategic Turnaround Equity Partners, LP (Cayman) v. Fife, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63629 (E.D. Mich. June 28, 2010): In this corporate dispute, Plaintiff Strategic Turnaround Equity Partners, L.P. (“Strategic”) claims that Defendants United American Healthcare Corporation (“UAHC”), Thomas Goss,…
Continue Reading

Full Compensation of Insured Does Not Preclude Contractual Subrogation — Issue of First Impression under Texas Law

From Amerisure Ins. Co. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14354 (5th Cir. July 13, 2010): The first issue that we must address is one of first impression for this court: whether Mid-Continent Insurance Co. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 236 S.W.3d 765, 776 (Tex. 2007), precludes contractual subrogation simply because ...
From Amerisure Ins. Co. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 14354 (5th Cir. July 13, 2010): The first issue that we must address is one of first impression for this court: whether Mid-Continent Insurance Co. v. Liberty Mutual…
Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Applies Regional Circuit Law to Discovery Matters Generally But Not When Substantive Patent Law Is Implicated

From In re Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas and Total Bank Solutions, LLC, 605 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2010): On August 19, 2009, Deutsche sought a protective order including a patent prosecution bar preventing anyone who gains access in the litigation to documents marked "confidential — patent prosecution bar" from any involvement in pro ...
From In re Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas and Total Bank Solutions, LLC, 605 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2010): On August 19, 2009, Deutsche sought a protective order including a patent prosecution bar preventing anyone who gains access in the…
Continue Reading
Previous378379380381382383384Next

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