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

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1), Does the 90-Day Period for Substitution Run from Service of Suggestion of Death on the Parties, Or Must the Non-Party Executor (Or Person Most Likely to Be Named Executor) Also Be Served? (Circuit Split)

 Jaudon v. Sasser, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37787 (S.D. Ga. Mar. 8, 2019): ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Objection to the Magistrate Judge's December ...
Jaudon v. Sasser, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37787 (S.D. Ga. Mar. 8, 2019): ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Objection to the Magistrate Judge's December 20, 2018 Order. (Docs. 43, 45.) For the reasons set forth [*2] …
Continue Reading

Possession of Professional (Law) License, Absent Practice in State, Insufficient to Confer Personal Jurisdiction — No Private Right of Action under Mail, Wire Fraud Statutes

Robinson v. Section 23, Prop. Owners’ Ass’n, Inc., 2019 WL 4673954 (3d Cir. Sept. 25, 2019) (unpublished): OPINION* PER CURIAM *1 Albert Robinson alleges that he is a Texan living in Georgia. He filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey an amended complaint nami ...
Robinson v. Section 23, Prop. Owners’ Ass’n, Inc., 2019 WL 4673954 (3d Cir. Sept. 25, 2019) (unpublished): OPINION* PER CURIAM *1 Albert Robinson alleges that he is a Texan living in Georgia. He filed in the United States District Court …
Continue Reading

Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence: “The Court Generally Has the Discretion to Take Judicial Notice of Internet Material” (Good Quote)

 Kennedy Stock, LLC v. NLS New York Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200811 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 18, 2019) (Report and Recommendation): REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE HON. PAUL G. GARDEPHE
Kennedy Stock, LLC v. NLS New York Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200811 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 18, 2019) (Report and Recommendation): REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE HON. PAUL G. GARDEPHE BARBARA MOSES, United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Kennedy Stock, LLC…
Continue Reading

Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine Applies in Civil Cases & to Appeals But Must Be Based on Misconduct in Instant Case Not Frustrating Another Court’s Jurisdiction, Judgment — Bankruptcy Automatic Stay Applies to Sanctions, Contempt

Kupperstein v. Schall (In re Kupperstein), 2019 WL 6044091 (1st Cir. Nov. 15, 2019): PREFACE *1 Five years ago, Thomas Sheedy bought Carol Thibodeau’s house for a pittance and gave it to appellant Donald Kupperstein, an attorney licensed in Massachusetts. The state court reversed the ...
Kupperstein v. Schall (In re Kupperstein), 2019 WL 6044091 (1st Cir. Nov. 15, 2019): PREFACE *1 Five years ago, Thomas Sheedy bought Carol Thibodeau’s house for a pittance and gave it to appellant Donald Kupperstein, an attorney licensed in Massachusetts. …
Continue Reading

Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine Generally Reserved for Issues of First Impression — Principal Reasons to Apply Doctrine

 Yashtinsky v. Walmart, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198731 (W.D. Ark. Nov. 12, 2019): Before the Court is Defendant Walmart, Inc.'s ("Walmart") Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Stay ...
Yashtinsky v. Walmart, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198731 (W.D. Ark. Nov. 12, 2019): Before the Court is Defendant Walmart, Inc.'s ("Walmart") Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Stay the Action. (Doc. 23). For the reasons set forth…
Continue Reading

Social Media Photographs — Authentication Depends on Proffer — If Offered for Identification, Only Fair & Accurate Portrayal Test — To Link Person to Photo for Other Purposes, Link Person to Page

Commonwealth v. Ford, 2019 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 3598 (Pa. Super. Ct. Sept. 23, 2019) (non-precedential): Raheem B. Ford appeals from the July 18, 2018 judgment of sentence entered by the Court of C ...
Commonwealth v. Ford, 2019 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 3598 (Pa. Super. Ct. Sept. 23, 2019) (non-precedential): Raheem B. Ford appeals from the July 18, 2018 judgment of sentence entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County following his …
Continue Reading

Daubert : Proponent’s Burden Is Reliability, Not Correctness — Non-Lawyer Technical Expert May Opine on Infringement

 Arason Enters. v. CabinetBed Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162008 (D. Colo. Sept. 23, 2019): This matter is before the Court on Defendant CabinetBed Inc.'s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Adrian Slattery o ...
Arason Enters. v. CabinetBed Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162008 (D. Colo. Sept. 23, 2019): This matter is before the Court on Defendant CabinetBed Inc.'s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Adrian Slattery on Alleged Infringement [Docket No. 62] and Defendant…
Continue Reading

Appealability of Attorney Criticism Absent Sanctions — Good Discussion of Spectrum — Actual Finding of Prof’l Misconduct Appealable — Warning Given in Denying Sanctions Not, Nor Is Referral to Disciplinary Comm. without Finding of Misconduct

Montalto v. Miss. Dept. of Corrections, 2019 WL 4296699 (5th Cir. Sept. 11, 2019): *1 Mississippi inmate Stephen Montalto filed a § 2254 petition for habeas relief seeking reinstatement of his earned-release supervision (ERS) and trusty time. Montalto alleged that the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC) had ...
Montalto v. Miss. Dept. of Corrections, 2019 WL 4296699 (5th Cir. Sept. 11, 2019): *1 Mississippi inmate Stephen Montalto filed a § 2254 petition for habeas relief seeking reinstatement of his earned-release supervision (ERS) and trusty time. Montalto alleged that…
Continue Reading

Inherent Power: Court Should Fashion Sanction That Is “Direct Response to the Harm” — Defiance of Court Order = Bad Faith — Court Need Not Use “Magic Words ‘Bad Faith’” (Good Quotes) — $7,000 Sanction for Ignoring Order to Pay $700 OK

Ibezim v. George Grp., Inc., 2019 WL 4668135 (11th Cir. Sept. 25, 2019) (unpublished): *1 This is a fight over fees. The appellant Michael Ibezim sued The GEO Group, Inc., his former employer, for employment discrimination. He lost. But before he lost, Ibezim and GEO Group agreed to mediate the case, choosing ATD Medi ...
Ibezim v. George Grp., Inc., 2019 WL 4668135 (11th Cir. Sept. 25, 2019) (unpublished): *1 This is a fight over fees. The appellant Michael Ibezim sued The GEO Group, Inc., his former employer, for employment discrimination. He lost. But before…
Continue Reading

Rule 11 Sanctions for Factually Misleading Complaint That Failed to Attach or Fully Explain Terms of Contract on Which It Relied — Compensatory Attorney’s Fees Appropriate Regardless of Receipient’s Indemnification by Third Party

  Superior Consulting Servs., Inc.v. Steeves-Kiss, 2019 WL 4318903 (9th Cir. Sept. 12, 2019): MEMORANDUM* Superior Consulting Services (“Superior”) appeals the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of its First Amended Complaint for common law unfair competition and conversion, as well as the district court’ ...
Superior Consulting Servs., Inc.v. Steeves-Kiss, 2019 WL 4318903 (9th Cir. Sept. 12, 2019): MEMORANDUM* Superior Consulting Services (“Superior”) appeals the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of its First Amended Complaint for common law unfair competition and conversion, as well as…
Continue Reading
Previous37383940414243Next

Recent Posts

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

Spoliation: Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e) Imposes a Higher Standard — Intent — Than Fourth Circuit Law Previously Applied to Spoliation of Electronically-Stored Information (And Still Does As to Non-ESI) — Willfulness vs. Intent

Inherent Power and § 1927 Sanctions: Removal of counsel from case, referral for disciplinary action, and award of fees and costs for assaulting opposing counsel at deposition — Failure to request hearing waive any right to a hearing — Notice and opportunity to be heard required before sua sponte sanctions imposed, whether under Rule 11, the inherent power of the court or § 1927 — Notice may come from court or opposing counsel — Order imposing sanctions cannot provide notice of sanctions — Nature of bad faith requirement for inherent power sanctions: bad faith to obstruct the judicial process or bring about violation of a court order — Sanctions proceeding need not defer (Younger abstention) to disciplinary proceeding involving the same conduct — Sanctions proceeding doesn’t threaten to interfere with disciplinary proceeding — Why District Court is accorded significant deference in matters concerning attorney’s fees

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