Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Complex Lit Blog

From Romano v. Kazacos, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 13220 (2d Cir. June 29, 2010), in which the issue was whether the complaint was subject to the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act: A. Master of the Complaint Appellants initially contend that the District Court impermissibly looked beyond the face of the amended compla ...
From Romano v. Kazacos, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 13220 (2d Cir. June 29, 2010), in which the issue was whether the complaint was subject to the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act: A. Master of the Complaint Appellants initially contend that…
From Katel LLC v. AT&T Corp., 607 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 2010): KATEL argues that the International Telecommunications Regulations ("ITRs") afford it a private right of action against AT&T. This is a matter of first impression for this Court. The ITRs have treaty status and were promulgated by the International Telecommunications Unio ...
From Katel LLC v. AT&T Corp., 607 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 2010): KATEL argues that the International Telecommunications Regulations (“ITRs”) afford it a private right of action against AT&T. This is a matter of first impression for this Court. The…
From Funai Elec. Co. v. Daewoo Elecs., 593 F. Supp. 2d 1088 (N.D. Cal. 2009): Expert witness fees are not available under § 285 but may be awarded under the Court's inherent power to sanction fraud or abuse of the judicial process. See Amsted Industries Inc. v. Buckeye Steel Castings Co., 23 F.3d 374, 377-78 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
From Funai Elec. Co. v. Daewoo Elecs., 593 F. Supp. 2d 1088 (N.D. Cal. 2009): Expert witness fees are not available under § 285 but may be awarded under the Court’s inherent power to sanction fraud or abuse of the…
From Molten Metal Equip. Innovations, Inc. v. Pyrotek, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64238 (N.D. Ohio June 29, 2010): "The Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") expresses a presumption that arbitration awards will be confirmed." *** "When courts are called on to review an arbitrator's decision, the review is very narrow; [it is] one of the narrow ...
From Molten Metal Equip. Innovations, Inc. v. Pyrotek, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64238 (N.D. Ohio June 29, 2010): “The Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) expresses a presumption that arbitration awards will be confirmed.” *** “When courts are called on to…
From Hallman v. Kantor, 72 A.D.3d 895 (2d Dept. 2010): The defendants submitted a retainer agreement reflecting that the plaintiff "understood, accepted and agreed" that the "scope of" their "engagement" was "to represent" her as a co-executor of her deceased father's estate. This documentary evidence conclusively established a defens ...
From Hallman v. Kantor, 72 A.D.3d 895 (2d Dept. 2010): The defendants submitted a retainer agreement reflecting that the plaintiff “understood, accepted and agreed” that the “scope of” their “engagement” was “to represent” her as a co-executor of her deceased…
Two cases: 1. From United States v. Laurent, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12449 (1st Cir. June 17, 2010): A "spoliation" instruction, allowing an adverse inference, is commonly appropriate in both civil and criminal cases where there is evidence from which a reasonable jury might conclude that evidence favorable to one side was dest ...
Two cases: 1. From United States v. Laurent, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12449 (1st Cir. June 17, 2010): A “spoliation” instruction, allowing an adverse inference, is commonly appropriate in both civil and criminal cases where there is evidence from which…
From Hardin v. Belmont Textile Mach. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61121 (W.D.N.C. June 7, 2010): [12(f).] Rule 12(f) provides that "[t]he court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) (emphasis added). Contrary to Plaintiff' ...
From Hardin v. Belmont Textile Mach. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61121 (W.D.N.C. June 7, 2010): [12(f).] Rule 12(f) provides that “[t]he court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” Fed.…
From Major Tours, Inc. v. Colorel, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62948 (D.N.J. June 22, 2010): The first question is whether, as a matter of law, a protective order under Rule 26(b)(2)(B) can ever be granted to a party when the evidence is inaccessible because of that party's failure to institute a litigation hold. The Court examines this questi ...
From Major Tours, Inc. v. Colorel, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62948 (D.N.J. June 22, 2010): The first question is whether, as a matter of law, a protective order under Rule 26(b)(2)(B) can ever be granted to a party when the…
From Jay E. Hayden Found. v. First Neighbor Bank, N.A., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12773 (7th Cir. June 22, 2010): A foundation created by Jay Hayden, and the estates of his mother and of another woman (R. Maurine Johnson), brought this RICO suit against a bank, two law firms, and seven persons connected with either the bank or the law firms. ...
From Jay E. Hayden Found. v. First Neighbor Bank, N.A., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12773 (7th Cir. June 22, 2010): A foundation created by Jay Hayden, and the estates of his mother and of another woman (R. Maurine Johnson), brought…
From Estate of Schneider v. Finmann, 2010 NY Slip Op 5281, 2010 N.Y. LEXIS 1169 (N.Y. Ct. App. June 17, 2010): In April 2000, decedent purchased a $ 1 million life insurance policy. Over several years, he transferred ownership of that property from himself to an entity of which he was principal owner, then to another entity of which he w ...
From Estate of Schneider v. Finmann, 2010 NY Slip Op 5281, 2010 N.Y. LEXIS 1169 (N.Y. Ct. App. June 17, 2010): In April 2000, decedent purchased a $ 1 million life insurance policy. Over several years, he transferred ownership of…

Recent Posts

Archives