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

Pendent Personal Jurisdiction: Generally, Extending Personal Jurisdiction to State Law Claims Arising Out of the Same Nucleus of Operative Facts as a Federal Claim over which Personal Jurisdiction Is Statutorily Conferred

From Conwill v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119214 (E.D. La. Dec. 22, 2009): Conwill urges that "once personal jurisdiction is established over Mr. Gordon for the purposes of the RICO claim, then this Court has personal jurisdiction over him for the purposes of the other claims in the Complaint that arise out of the same ...
From Conwill v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119214 (E.D. La. Dec. 22, 2009): Conwill urges that “once personal jurisdiction is established over Mr. Gordon for the purposes of the RICO claim, then this Court has personal jurisdiction…
Continue Reading

Purchasers of Derivative Securities May Bring a 10(b)(5) Against the Issuer of the Underlying, Bundled Securities — Issue of First Impression — Link to “The Subprime Primer”

From Tolin v. AMBAC Fin. Group, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119986 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2009): This action raises what appears to be a question of first impression in this Circuit: does the Second Circuit's decision in Ontario Pub. Serv. Employees Union Pension Trust Fund v. Nortel Networks Corp., 369 F.3d 27 (2d Cir. 2004) (hereinafter "Nortel" ...
From Tolin v. AMBAC Fin. Group, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119986 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2009): This action raises what appears to be a question of first impression in this Circuit: does the Second Circuit’s decision in Ontario Pub. Serv. Employees…
Continue Reading

Materials Appropriately Considered on 12(b)(2) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction — Effect on Construing Complaint in Plaintiff’s Favor

From Conwill v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119214 (E.D. La. Dec. 22, 2009): Before the Court is a motion to dismiss pursuant to 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure***. The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the Court's jurisdiction over a defendant, by making a prima facie case, if the Court ...
From Conwill v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119214 (E.D. La. Dec. 22, 2009): Before the Court is a motion to dismiss pursuant to 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure***. The plaintiff bears the burden of…
Continue Reading

Rule 12(f) Motions to Strike and 12(e) Motions for a More Definite Statement — Standards

From Kauinui v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100765 (D. Hawaii Oct. 28, 2009): Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f), the Court may strike "from any pleading any insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). This includes striking parts of the prayer for ...
From Kauinui v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100765 (D. Hawaii Oct. 28, 2009): Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f), the Court may strike “from any pleading any insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or…
Continue Reading

In Prosecution of Judge for Receiving Bribes, Expert Testimony on the Correctness of Judge’s Allegedly-Influenced Rulings Excluded

From U.S. v. Whitfield, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 27003 (5th Cir. Dec. 11, 2009): Defendants-appellants, attorney Paul Minor and former Mississippi state judges John Whitfield and Walter ("Wes") Teel, were charged with participating in two separate bribery schemes in which Minor arranged, guaranteed, and eventually paid off loans for Whitfiel ...
From U.S. v. Whitfield, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 27003 (5th Cir. Dec. 11, 2009): Defendants-appellants, attorney Paul Minor and former Mississippi state judges John Whitfield and Walter (“Wes”) Teel, were charged with participating in two separate bribery schemes in which…
Continue Reading

In Diversity Action, Federal Court Applies Federal Law in Determining Enforceability of Forum Selection Clause — Circuit Split

From Wong v. Partygaming Ltd., 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 27914; 2009 (6th Cir. Dec. 21, 2009): To support its dismissal for forum non conveniens, the district court cited to the Gibraltar forum selection clause. Thus, as a threshold matter, we must determine whether the clause should be enforced. We review the enforceability of a forum select ...
From Wong v. Partygaming Ltd., 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 27914; 2009 (6th Cir. Dec. 21, 2009): To support its dismissal for forum non conveniens, the district court cited to the Gibraltar forum selection clause. Thus, as a threshold matter, we…
Continue Reading

Sanctions for Improper Removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) Must be Imposed on Party, Not Counsel — First Impression in Courts of Appeals — District Court Caselaw Split

From MR Crescent City, LLC v. Draper, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 26585 (4th Cir. Dec. 7, 2009): This case presents a purely legal question: whether 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) permits the imposition of legal fees on an attorney who erroneously removes a case from state to federal court. The district court held that it does not. We affirm. Th ...
From MR Crescent City, LLC v. Draper, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 26585 (4th Cir. Dec. 7, 2009): This case presents a purely legal question: whether 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) permits the imposition of legal fees on an attorney who erroneously…
Continue Reading

Damages Expert Testimony Relying Wholesale on Untested Opinions of Ultimate Party Client and Another Expert Excluded — Good Quotes

From Mooring Capital Fund, LLC v. Phoenix Central, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117799 (W.D. Okla. Feb. 12, 2009): Dr. Horrell is offered as a damages expert. His expert report includes various tables purporting to summarize defendants' damages in three areas, each of which is essentially an element of a "lost profits" calculation: (1) ...
From Mooring Capital Fund, LLC v. Phoenix Central, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117799 (W.D. Okla. Feb. 12, 2009): Dr. Horrell is offered as a damages expert. His expert report includes various tables purporting to summarize defendants’ damages in three…
Continue Reading

Post-Mohawk, Mandamus Available for Interlocutory Review of Denial of Privilege Assertion (Here, First Amendment Defense to Production of Internal Campaign Deliberations)

From Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 27064 (9th Cir. Dec. 11, 2009): In the event that we do not have jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine [in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Mohawk Indus. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. ___ (Dec. 8, 2009)], we would have authority to grant the remedy of mandamus. ...
From Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 27064 (9th Cir. Dec. 11, 2009): In the event that we do not have jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine [in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Mohawk Indus. v. Carpenter,…
Continue Reading

No Injunctive Relief Available to Private Plaintiffs under RICO

From Minter v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6230 (D. Md. Jan. 14, 2009): Unlike most of the issues raised by Defendants in their motion for summary judgment, whether injunctive relief is available under … civil RICO, is a purely legal question…. The only two courts of appeals to have addressed this issue directly, th ...
From Minter v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6230 (D. Md. Jan. 14, 2009): Unlike most of the issues raised by Defendants in their motion for summary judgment, whether injunctive relief is available under … civil RICO,…
Continue Reading
Previous397398399400401402403Next

Recent Posts

Inherent Power Sanctions — Dismissal for Threatening Defendant and Magistrate Judge — No First Amendment Right to Threaten Violence

RICO: Domestic Injury — Delivery of Fraudulently Non-Conforming Goods FOB Los Angeles for Shipment to China Means Injury Arose Domestically When Purchaser Took Title —Other Relevant Factors Include That The Non-Conforming Goods Were Sourced and Made in the U.S. and The Racketeering Activity (Mail/Wire Fraud) Occurred in, and Was Directed from, the United States — Irrelevant to Domestic Injury Inquiry Whether Property Is Tangible or Intangible — 7th Circuit’s “Injury-Felt” Test of Domestic Injury Rejected by Supreme Court — RICO Standing Requires Concrete Financial Loss, Not Merely Injury to Valuable Intangible Property Interest (9th Circuit)

RICO Causation: Parents of Children with Disabilities Deprived In-Person Education and Services during the Pandemic Were Not Causally Injured by Teachers’ False Assurances to Federal Authorities That IDEA-Complaint Policies Were in Place, Which Caused Funds to Issue But Not to the Benefit of the Disabled Children — Damages Too Indirect — Proper Plaintiff Is U.S. Government — Private Injunctive Relief Under RICO Uncertain in Third Circuit

Sanctions: Rule 37(b)(2) Dismissal — Sixth Circuit Factors

Inherent Power Sanctions — Extrajudicial Misconduct: Sanctions Power Extends to Conduct Intended to Sabotage Court’s Ability to Adjudicate the Case Before It, Here, By Commencing State Court Actions Seeking to Enjoin the Federal Plaintiffs from Proceeding with Their Federal Litigation — Sanctions Fee Awards: The Factors Used For Calculating A Fee Award To A Prevailing Party Do Not Govern — Under Goodyear, the Relevant Inquiry Is Whether There Is A Sufficient Causal Link Between The Sanctioned Misconduct And The Fees Awarded

RICO: Members of Association-in-Fact Enterprise Must Act with a Common Purpose—Mere Allegation That Various Defendants Agreed at Different Times to Engage in Various Fraudulent Schemes Does Not Plausibly Support the Essential Inference, That They Acted with s Sufficiently Common Purpose

RICO Causation: (1) State’s Misrepresentation to Federal Government That It Was Providing Plaintiffs with Mandated Special Education Did Not Cause Plaintiffs’ Injury Because The Failure to Provide The Education Was Not Caused by the Fraud on the Federal Government — (2) The Three Factors for Assessing RICO Causation — (3) Limits of the Second Circuit’s Decision in Alix v. McKinsey That Causation Can Be Established Where A Fraud On The Judiciary “Or Other Governmental Entity” Resulted In A Resource Going To Someone Less Deserving

Rule 41(b): Five Factors to Be Weighed in Deciding Whether Dismissal Is Appropriate (Second Circuit) — Is A Finding of Bad Faith or Fault Required if Dismissal Is Without Prejudice? — Undecided If Truly Without Prejudice But It Is Required If the Without Prejudice Dismissal Will Act as a Dismissal on the Merits (Here, Because of the Statute of Limitations) — Failure To Consider A Lesser Sanction Than Dismissal Is Generally An Abuse Of Discretion

Spoliation Sanctions/Mootness: Stipulation Resolving “All Pending Discovery Disputes,” Which Are Enumerated, Does Not Moot Subsequent Sanctions Motion for ESI Spoliation — Postjudgment Sanctions Order Is Appealable When District Court Has Finally Disposed of Both Liability and Amount

Rule 37 Default Judgment Sanction: (1) Default Judgment Appropriate Only As a Last Resort, When Less Drastic Sanctions Would Not Ensure Compliance with the Court’s Orders — (2) Default Judgment Sanction Requires Willful or Bad Faith Failure to Obey Discovery Order — (3) Fugitive Defendant’s Failure to Appear at Court-Ordered, Remote Deposition Despite Court Warning That Sanctions Could Follow Disobedience Warrants Default Judgment — (4) District Court Afforded Wide Discretion in Interpreting Its Own Orders — (5) Filing a Notice of Appeal from a Non-Appealable Order (Here, a Discovery Order) Does Not Deprive the District Court of Jurisdiction over the Case

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